how-to block ads
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Still better than the alternatives said by Nightfall:Comcast is way behind in HD, while Dish is trying to expand to keep up. Directv, IMO, is worth the price I pay every month. Interesting way of thinking.. and incorrect, to be honest. "WAY BEHIND"... really? DirecTV JUST launched their additional HD networks a few months ago.. so how is Comcast "way behind".. it's a neck and neck race between the different carriers all around.. Comcast will make a technology change and soar past DirecTV in a short period of time.. DirecTV will launch a new bird and do the same.. if years had gone by with NO action, then I'd say "way behind"... but we're talking a couple months. And, if you want to look at the reality of the offerings between the two, they are, in many opinions, about the same.
In many Comcast areas, now, there is a line up of about 36 HD channels available. If you look at the actual HD that is available from D to the consumer, while it is more, it's not MUCH more.
Seems that the TV industry as a whole will keep bringing their rates up about 3-5% every year for a long time to come.
What is the TV industry "as a whole"..? To be honest, the rates for the networks are set by the networks, not the providers. There are some rates directly influenced by the cable operator as well.. but in whole, yea, I agree.. rates for pay/premium TV will continue to go up - as everything does in life. | |
|   NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
1 edit | Re: Still better than the alternatives said by fiberguy:said by Nightfall:Comcast is way behind in HD, while Dish is trying to expand to keep up. Directv, IMO, is worth the price I pay every month. Interesting way of thinking.. and incorrect, to be honest. "WAY BEHIND"... really? DirecTV JUST launched their additional HD networks a few months ago.. so how is Comcast "way behind".. it's a neck and neck race between the different carriers all around.. Comcast will make a technology change and soar past DirecTV in a short period of time.. DirecTV will launch a new bird and do the same.. if years had gone by with NO action, then I'd say "way behind"... but we're talking a couple months. And, if you want to look at the reality of the offerings between the two, they are, in many opinions, about the same. In many Comcast areas, now, there is a line up of about 36 HD channels available. If you look at the actual HD that is available from D to the consumer, while it is more, it's not MUCH more. Seems that the TV industry as a whole will keep bringing their rates up about 3-5% every year for a long time to come.
What is the TV industry "as a whole"..? To be honest, the rates for the networks are set by the networks, not the providers. There are some rates directly influenced by the cable operator as well.. but in whole, yea, I agree.. rates for pay/premium TV will continue to go up - as everything does in life. Yup, I said way behind. Look at this comparison...
»www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthre···t=419472
Directv has 52 National HD channels and 13 on the horizon.
Comcast has 23 National HD channels and 3 on the horizon.
I think that is a pretty big difference. Oh, and Comcast did drag their heels on HD for a while. Which is why Directv is beating them now. Will Comcast close the gap? I have read a lot of articles about it, and that is all it is right now is just banter. Until something is done about it, that is when I will believe it. You seem rather confident that Comcast will do it. What are your sources?
Lets deal with what we know right now. Directv is in 1st place over for national HD offerings and until Comcast or some other provider can outdo them, they are in 1st place for a reason. At least give them kudos for that instead of dancing around with your "hearsay" and Comcasts' claims to what they will do. 
Thanks for the clarification on my statement. I should have said providers and not the "TV Industry". | |
| | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Still better than the alternatives Dude, don't fall into the trap on either side..
For one, how long did it take DirecTV to get their bird up and running from time of announcement to the time of launch? 3 years! By your own definition, I'd call that sitting on their ass.
1st place? DirecTV is in 1st place? WHO CARES?! Honesty dude.. the way you talk, and others, it sounds like you sit at home on the sidelines like you're at a race track listening for the announcer to call who's in first.. and who's coming in to place and show. There is always going to be a change and movement in technology.
Do I need to have a source for my call? no.. I don't. It's a matter of fact. People commonly can't separate press releases for investors and the general public - and there is a difference. When things are discussed in trade magazines, they are not written or intended for the general public. There IS a life cycle of how products come to market.
Too many people site back, almost daily (i'll leave names out of this post) as if every month a new technology should roll out. Talk about a TOTAL over expectation factor... the honest truth is that it takes FAR more time to upgrade and expand a wireline service than it does a satellite service. AND, with so much new technology being thrown out, I don't blame wireline operators for taking a caution look at what's in the future. It's not cheap to rebuilt or retrofit existing plant with technology that may be inferior OR out paced by something just around the corner.
Also, to be honest, even at 36 "national HD" networks, at this time, HD is STILL just coming to play. In my opinion, call it 37 bs 52, I'd say that there isn't much of a gap between the two for me to see much of a difference or even care right now.
It's only natural that improvements are coming on both sides. It's been the natural course and pace shown by history... the one thing I personally don't do is sit on a sideline with my popcorn, hotdog, and cold beer rooting for one side of the other.... it does nothing, won't change anything, and only time will show what's to come. To be honest, I'd rather wait and have the right choices made by my provider to deliver me the next generation of services. Short sighted changes only end up costing us all more. Satellite does this regularly but the only difference is that they pass the cost DIRECTLY to the existing customer base who wishes to take advantage of the "new" service when they are available...
I'm more of a sit back and wait person. Having been an early adopter on just about everything out there, I won't do it any more.. It's my turn to sit back and wait for others to waste their money this time.  | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·Embarq Now Centu..
| Re: Still better than the alternatives said by fiberguy:For one, how long did it take DirecTV to get their bird up and running from time of announcement to the time of launch? 3 years! By your own definition, I'd call that sitting on their ass. Not that it really matters much as to who's 1st, 2nd, etc, but in the satellite industry any launch of a new spacecraft usually takes on the order of 2 1/2 to 3 years. And that assumes there are no serious manufacturing complications or other surprises in the program.
Considering it costs on the order of $125M for a geostationary spacecraft and another $125M for launch, insurance, etc. its quite a commitment. And there's little room for mistakes since once its up there defects cannot be simply fixed by a truck roll.
Anyway, most folks are usually remarkably surprised how little sitting on one's ass it takes to get a bird up there from the time of its announcement, to funding, design, build, component integration, extensive testing, launch, and ultimately acceptance and being in commercial service. It really *is* rocket science! | |
| | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Still better than the alternatives You're pretty right about those costs... pretty easy for satellite on that end. Much of the other 'costs' involved in flipping on new tech like HD for them is passed on to the consumer in the form of new equipment upgrades and full retail.
Also.. that 125 million figure you threw out.. so you know, I will give you a little feedback in return. Just for the Twin Cities market, pre-TimeWarner's inclusion, to go to ADS was about 60 million alone.. ONE system and that is out of how many nationwide?
So, as my point was eluding to, it cost cable far more money to upgrade and bring in new technology than it does the birds. AND, on top of that one, there is the time it takes to physically perform the installation or upgrades to the plants.
This is why I'm saying that the remark of "way behind the times" (or late in the game) is incorrect. This really is a horse race and they are all neck and neck.. only one horse has pulled out and take a lead for a moment in time. | |
| | | | | NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| Re: Still better than the alternatives said by fiberguy:You're pretty right about those costs... pretty easy for satellite on that end. Much of the other 'costs' involved in flipping on new tech like HD for them is passed on to the consumer in the form of new equipment upgrades and full retail. Also.. that 125 million figure you threw out.. so you know, I will give you a little feedback in return. Just for the Twin Cities market, pre-TimeWarner's inclusion, to go to ADS was about 60 million alone.. ONE system and that is out of how many nationwide? So, as my point was eluding to, it cost cable far more money to upgrade and bring in new technology than it does the birds. AND, on top of that one, there is the time it takes to physically perform the installation or upgrades to the plants. This is why I'm saying that the remark of "way behind the times" (or late in the game) is incorrect. This really is a horse race and they are all neck and neck.. only one horse has pulled out and take a lead for a moment in time. To say its a horse race and they are all neck and neck, but one horse has taken the lead really doesn't make sense. Is it that hard to admit that Directv is in the lead?
The infrastructure of the cable companies is vast, which does have advantages and disadvantages. One of the disadvantages is the higher cost and need of more people to maintain. The higher cost associated with it is also bad. However, their footprint is huge and with high speed internet applied to it, they have a service which is valuable.
My big question is, why hasn't Comcast or Time Warner stepped up to the plate to offer more HD? Maybe its because more people don't have HDTV. Maybe its the cost of implementation. Who knows.
Point is that, for people wanting HDTV now, its a safe bet that Directv will be the leader for the next 1-2 years easy. You are correct, everything will balance out, but if I had to guess how long that will take it will probably be at least 2 years. Until then, if you were going to get HDTV, would you go with the company with the most HD channels or the one that has less than 1/2 the HD channels for a more expensive price? The decision is very clear to me. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Still better than the alternatives would you go with the company with the most HD channels or the one that has less than 1/2 the HD channels for a more expensive price? The decision is very clear to me.
=======================================================
and is sure gonna make you pay to see those HD cannels, well I'll drop HD, | |
| | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Dude - horse races.. you don't watch them do you? you're sitting here blinding yourself with this un-necessary competition you are having in your head while rooting for your 'team'.. if you don't get a neck and neck race and one side pulls ahead.. if you don't get what that means,.. then you're obviously being blinded by something else. It is only YOU that wants to see a "clear winner" in this so-called race ...
It took DirecTV 3+ years to launch their HD service.. or did you not read that? Not to mention, you say that Comcast and TWC aren't stepping up to the plate? Um, I now have 37 HD channels on my system.. and so do many other systems - so it sounds like they HAVE been stepping up to the plate. The HD game started long ago.. not the day they flipped the switch.
Your point, about your safe bet on DirecTV and for 1-2 years is a bad point.. you don't know.. analysts don't know (and are often wrong) and people don't all think alike. You also forget that many people don't 1) like to be roped into contracts by ANYONE... and 2) the cost to upgrade to DirecTV for existing customers OFTEN pushes them to cable. 3) Many people aren't fair weathered customers and switch when the technology blows...
Some people are just WAY off in their analysis and it's pretty clear by this post alone. | |
| | | | | | | NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| Re: Still better than the alternatives said by fiberguy:Dude - horse races.. you don't watch them do you? you're sitting here blinding yourself with this un-necessary competition you are having in your head while rooting for your 'team'.. if you don't get a neck and neck race and one side pulls ahead.. if you don't get what that means,.. then you're obviously being blinded by something else. It is only YOU that wants to see a "clear winner" in this so-called race ... It took DirecTV 3+ years to launch their HD service.. or did you not read that? Not to mention, you say that Comcast and TWC aren't stepping up to the plate? Um, I now have 37 HD channels on my system.. and so do many other systems - so it sounds like they HAVE been stepping up to the plate. The HD game started long ago.. not the day they flipped the switch. Your point, about your safe bet on DirecTV and for 1-2 years is a bad point.. you don't know.. analysts don't know (and are often wrong) and people don't all think alike. You also forget that many people don't 1) like to be roped into contracts by ANYONE... and 2) the cost to upgrade to DirecTV for existing customers OFTEN pushes them to cable. 3) Many people aren't fair weathered customers and switch when the technology blows... Some people are just WAY off in their analysis and it's pretty clear by this post alone. So it took Directv 3+ years to launch their HD service? What point are you trying to make?
Comcast and TWC are not taking HD seriously. Take a look at the grid. Thats a statement of fact. Only 26 HD channels in all markets with only 2 that are projected to be added? I think thats pretty lackluster and they could do much much better. You are right, they are stepping up to the plate, but they are whiffing at 50% of their pitches.
It sounds like to me that you are a hater of Directv, and thats fine. Me? I consider myself to be an informed consumer and when I made the move to HD in November, I made the best decision I could. I looked at the grid I posted, looked at the strong move to HD that Directv was pushing to, read the reviews on the service, and pulled the trigger.
Now, you can claim that I am way off my analysis here and that I am totally in the wrong state of mind. The fact of the matter is right now, for HD, Diretv is ahead of the game. At the finish line, all providers will have all channels available in HD. All the points you bring up on why to and why not to move to Directv are all legit. Those decisions are best left up to the consumer. Its obvious you didn't want those things, but that doesn't mean DTV is a bad decision to go with.
I know its hard to admit that cable companies are lagging behind in the HD race. Maybe eventually, you will see that reality.
As I said before, technology changes so quickly. Who knows who will be leader in the next 1-2 years. Its a safe bet right now that Directv will be one of the leaders in HD programming for the next 1-2 years. If Comcast or TWC steps up to the plate, I will be a happy camper as I will be moving to that provider for sure. I just don't have faith in them doing that anytime soon. | |
| | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Still better than the alternatives You need to re-read your own posts.. and when you do, I'll talk more with you about this but not until then.
You're sitting there pissing that "comcast and TWC are doing nothing about HD" to which you are 100% wrong or simply blind.
I see you have so much time to look at each and every single system out there as to how much HD is available, haven't you?
You think that DirecTV just threw up a bird over night and had HD? It took 3+ years..
Second, Comcast has been working on HD for some time now, not sitting on their hands (refraining from using foul language her) and you still say they have no plans. So, I never hear anyone say "DirecTV had no plans for HD" which in truth, they have.. and it took them 3+ years to get there!
Comcast IS working on it.. in fact, they just added another 13 channels the other day in many markets.. that, too, didn't come over night.
I don't know what's funnier... your so-called facts which should be filed with the Charmin in the reading room? or the fact that you THINK you know what you're talking about when it's clear that you don't - rather, you should grab your cheer leading outfit and pomp pomps and start cheering. The sooner you get off on this "you're a fan of" stuff, the sooner you can look past that and get to the facts.. or even your own arguments that you're making. I don't hate DirecTV.. it's NOTHING about that, nor will I defend or even discuss anything on that level.. I'll leave that up to people with no life and anything better to do. We're talking about a statement made and the thinking behind it.. that's all. If you want to go personal, I'll be happy to - privately.. it won't be pretty though. But, there really is no need.
And for the last time WHO CARE WHO IS CURRENTLY IN THE LEAD! What difference does that make? NONE! ZIPPO! NADA! As soon as people get it out of their head that it's not a football game, it's not a play by play situation, and that there really is no end point.. the better. Being a "leader" in these days, is a badge they wear for a VERY short period of time. It goes back and forth - how hard is that to get? You say that Comcast is "stepping up to the plate" but what you don't get is that they have been working on this, like DirecTV had been for 3 years, already.. you are just, as a CONSUMER, starting to see some of the work come to light. THAT is my point!
Put the pomp pomps down now. | |
|
| | | "Will Comcast close the gap?"
Sure they will.
"they are in 1st place for a reason"
That reason is that there is less "work" involved in their upgrades.
I recently switched from DISH to DTV. After going through and making a list of the channels I watch regularly I found out that there were about 15 channels I usually scan through. With Direct TV 12 out of 15 channels are in HD, with DISH 8 of them were in HD. So to me it was not how many total HD channels did they have but how many of the channels that I watch were in HD.
Comcast isn't an option here, it's Charter. | |
| |  Ebolla
join:2005-09-28
Dracut, MA | said by Nightfall:Yup, I said way behind. Look at this comparison... » www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthre···t=419472Directv has 52 National HD channels and 13 on the horizon. Comcast has 23 National HD channels and 3 on the horizon. I think that is a pretty big difference. Oh, and Comcast did drag their heels on HD for a while. Which is why Directv is beating them now. Comcast also has alot of HD content on VOD, I know it isnt the same as channels, but to me starting a show whenever as opposed to at a scheduled time trumps the extra channels. I record enough content on DVR's as is that I prefer NOT to tie up my limited space with HD content I can find in VOD. | |
| | | | But really, define a channel...
PPV HD isn't a channel to me.
HD Locals I can't get isn't a channel to me.
What people want to count as channels are the channels they get now in SD in HD.
I have Dish now, and let me tell ya, there's nothing like telling people I get The KungFu Channel in HD! :rolleyes: | |
| | | NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| Re: Still better than the alternatives said by Uncle Paul:But really, define a channel... PPV HD isn't a channel to me. HD Locals I can't get isn't a channel to me. What people want to count as channels are the channels they get now in SD in HD. I have Dish now, and let me tell ya, there's nothing like telling people I get The KungFu Channel in HD! :rolleyes: Take a look at the grid link I posted previously in this thread. I am not counting local HD channels at all into the mix. Same with PPV for that matter. Heck, if PPV was being counted, Comcast has announced 1000 HD channels, but a majority of them are PPV channels which is just crazy to me. | |
|
 dbmavenThere's no shortagePremium,Mod
join:1999-10-26
Sty in Sky
kudos:2
·VOIPo
·Optimum Online
Host:
Filesharing Software
No, I Will Not Fix..
Road Runner
Bright House Netwo..
Computer Hardware ..
| said by fiberguy:it's a neck and neck race between the different carriers all around.. Comcast will make a technology change and soar past DirecTV in a short period of time.. DirecTV will launch a new bird and do the same.. if years had gone by with NO action, then I'd say "way behind"... but we're talking a couple months. And, if you want to look at the reality of the offerings between the two, they are, in many opinions, about the same. In many Comcast areas, now, there is a line up of about 36 HD channels available. If you look at the actual HD that is available from D to the consumer, while it is more, it's not MUCH more. Nobody is going to "soar" past anybody else - because the content simply isn't available. DirecTV is in the lead. Eventually the other distributors will catch up. Once that happens, there may be a few channels here and there - but essentially parity will be achieved and maintained.
--
If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?
Living in "an optimized state of temporary chaos" | |
| | NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| Re: Still better than the alternatives said by dbmaven:said by fiberguy:it's a neck and neck race between the different carriers all around.. Comcast will make a technology change and soar past DirecTV in a short period of time.. DirecTV will launch a new bird and do the same.. if years had gone by with NO action, then I'd say "way behind"... but we're talking a couple months. And, if you want to look at the reality of the offerings between the two, they are, in many opinions, about the same. In many Comcast areas, now, there is a line up of about 36 HD channels available. If you look at the actual HD that is available from D to the consumer, while it is more, it's not MUCH more. Nobody is going to "soar" past anybody else - because the content simply isn't available. DirecTV is in the lead. Eventually the other distributors will catch up. Once that happens, there may be a few channels here and there - but essentially parity will be achieved and maintained. Best post so far. The key is, if you are going to invest in HD right now, which provider would you go with? Directv is making good money off their HD offerings for a reason. | |
|
| |
|
