| reply to Rick
Re: Hmm... What do you want us to do, pat you on the back because Comcast has such a great picture in Waterbury?
We get it - you like love Comcast. You'd find some way to justify continuing to love Comcast if they literally took your first born.
And please explain to me what exactly is second-rate about satellite. The fact that they cooperate with Internet forums on releasing beta software for their boxes containing new features? The fact that they've been continuing to increase picture quality by shifting to MPEG4 compression? The fact that DirecTV has more HD channels than any other major provider? The fact that DirecTV offers remote booking and media share/networking capabilities?
You say rain fade is a problem with satellite? Then perhaps you should talk to the thousands of customers in the Seattle area who went without Comcast's services for a month after the December 2006 windstorm.
If anything, it's Comcast's bogus ads about having "more HD", omitting the word "channels" after those two words, that wreaks of desperation. |
|
 RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
1 edit | My experience is that satellite's hd picture is 2nd rate to what I have on Comcast. Not to mention the hassles of satellite service in general and the way it's generally impacted by weather related issues..not to mention the compression which creates an inferior picture IMHO.
I really don't see where a picture that people are going to outerspace to get is ever going to compete with one delivered via fiber/coax straight to the TV.
Common sense says otherwise..and even people who have satellite HSI see the reality of having a signal delivered in that manner.
Why then would tv..and especially hdtv..be any different?
I realize that for some..it works..and works fine for their purposes. And I think that's great. I don't think it will ever be comparable however to either cable or to what Verizon will offer with FIOS. |
|
|
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | said by Rick:My experience is that satellite's hd picture is 2nd rate to what I have on Comcast. Not to mention the hassles of satellite service in general and the way it's generally impacted by weather related issues..not to mention the compression which creates an inferior picture IMHO. Funny that my neighbor's DirecTV never goes out but when we get a good storm here Comcast goes down faster than a $10 hooker. Funny indeed.
said by Rick:I really don't see where a picture that people are going to outerspace to get is ever going to compete with one delivered via fiber/coax straight to the TV. You do realize that all of those cable channel moving pictures you watch on your evidently blurry TV are the result of Comcast going to outer space to get them, right?
said by Rick:Common sense says otherwise..and even people who have satellite HSI see the reality of having a signal delivered in that manner. Satellite HSI is a totally different animal. Running out of ideas already?
said by Rick:Why then would tv..and especially hdtv..be any different? Because it is different?
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY | reply to Rick
said by Rick:I really don't see where a picture that people are going to outerspace to get is ever going to compete with one delivered via fiber/coax straight to the TV. Common sense says otherwise..and even people who have satellite HSI see the reality of having a signal delivered in that manner. Why then would tv..and especially hdtv..be any different? better go tell comcast that, considering they are delivering said channels to your local headend via satellite. |
|
| reply to Rick
I've never seen China but I'm sure everything I've ever seen is prettier than anything in China.
Do I need to explain what a fallacy is to you? |
|
| reply to plat2on1
But those are 18" oval dishes while the ones at Comcast are big dishes. Little dishes they have are smaller so it's different completely. Big dishes are big so they're different and it's nothing like the other way.
The Aristocrats!
Heh |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | You've made my head hurt...
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to Rick
said by Rick:I really don't see where a picture that people are going to outerspace to get is ever going to compete with one delivered via fiber/coax straight to the TV. Ummmm... many of your channels get to Comcast by some form of satellite communications anyways. In the west (southwest in particular), I've experienced an outage once since 2003, and it was for a few minutes during a REALLY heavy downpour. My nieghbours cable has been out more than that. As far as one way/basic TV, satellite is a very simple/easy technology, with very few points of failure. Cable/Telco IPTV has multiple points of failure to deal with... cable/copper plant, local node, and the miles of wire/fiber in between. I'm not saying satellite is pefect... just simpler.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
| reply to Rick
Re: Hmm... You are just trolling, weather affects cable service just as much as satellite. If there is a crack in the cable and water gets in, watch what happens to your signal. |
|
| reply to en102
Hey now slow down.......
Don't put IPTV in the samebag. My Uverse image quality is fantastic. And the cable and telco iptv are not even in the same league.
I have went through (in over 30 years) DirecTV, WoW, Comcrap, Dish and local jimbob types... So far, nothing comes close to Uverse. Its absolutely the next best thing to FiOS. |
|
en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | I didn't say the picture was any different, did I ?
I just stated the fact that Comcast Rick was making was a little off.
Satellite is used for most TV communication regardless.
Analog cable signal isn't worth much these days, nor have been the lower 69 channels, unless they are digital sourced.
I'd try IPTV, however, the nearest demo site is nearly 100 miles away, and still no VoIP here.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
