RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to Rick
Re: Hmm... Something tells me a satellite salesman posting made-up crap at AVS would meet the same fate as a spyware vendor talking trash here in the Security forum.
The evidence is there. Maybe you need a new TV to see what a good HD picture looks like.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
 RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | said by RadioDoc:Maybe you need a new TV to see what a good HD picture looks like. I have a great new HD Samsung set together with a great bose 901 surround sound system.
And, the picture delivered via comcast hd is awesome.
Perhaps it's people with lesser setups who are having the problems because I'm certainly not.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Bose: Better sound through marketing.
I'll put the AVS forum folks up against you opinion any day.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
|
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | said by RadioDoc:Bose: Better sound through marketing. I'll put the AVS forum folks up against you opinion any day. That's just the point though Doc. I don't put my opinion up against anyones. I actually have and subscribe to the service..and have seen what the competition has to offer.
Do you even have hd service from Comcast or are you just relying on these obviously blatant and false articles?
And, I'd hardly compare some snow covered tiny residential satellite dangling from someones side porch with the monster sized satellites that cable operators get SOME of their feeds from. Of course..the others..they get directly via fiber feeds directly from the broadcasters themselves from what I understand.
It has been shown here at bbr time and time again..the problems people complain about with satellite service.
And it's very noticable with satellite hsi service.
The lag..and the latency is what they get. And that SAME thing is what is delivering their overcompressed hd pictures.
I simply see no comparison whatsoever to a fiber to the node/coax way of delivering a signal or..in the case of Verizon..a ftth connection.
People see 2000ms delays and packet loss with their satellite Hsi. It IS the same with Tv.
No way will I EVER believe that satellite hd is better than what cable operators deliver.
Is it an alternative? Yes. And it works for some.
But I wouldn't want it. It's second rate IMHO.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
1 edit | reply to RadioDoc
Bose is the sound system people buy when they want to brag to their friends about the great system they got. It's mid-range in terms of quality but it's like bragging you got a new Hyundai.
Rick doesn't understand technical details so he only engages in confirmation bias when it comes to these discussions. Bashing "satellite" because it transmits a picture through space is like bashing U-P's cargo because they use rails |
|
| reply to RadioDoc
All Highs, No Lows, Must be BOSE. |
|
Gunner
join:2004-01-29
Carmel, IN | reply to Rick
said by Rick: I have a great new HD Samsung set together with a great bose 901 surround sound system. Wow. You just lost any credibility right there. 'Great' and 'Bose' in the same sentence is an oxymoron...a paradox even.
And as far as compression and satellite TV go...what do you think Comcast does to all of their channels, especially their HD channels? They compress the holy hell out of them. I have Compress Comcast HD, and their HBOHD channel pisses me off on a regular basis...compressed all to hell, pixelated, noisy, horrible on dark scenes...it is 'HD-Lite' if I've ever seen it. Get yourself an OTA antenna and watch some HD channels. Worlds apart. You may be due for an eye exam, my friend. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
1 edit | reply to Rick
"I don't put my opinion up against anyones."
Wow, that is unbelievable. You blabber away like a Comcast public relations parrot every chance you get and because of it your credibility is shot, especially when you attempt to discredit a talented bunch of unbiased experts like those who hang out at »www.avsforum.com/.
You've seen what *one* market is offered. That is about as valid as looking at the car dealers on one street on one day and extrapolating that to every car dealer on every street. You've never had any of the other services you compare Comcast to so your opinion is absolute rubbish.
There are far more complaints about Comcast here than any satellite service. Maybe you should look around some. Pay particular attention to all of those snow covered tiny residential satellite dishes dangling from someones side porch that are rapidly replacing service delivered by Comcast's badly maintained, badly operated cable systems here. I should post pictures of them. On this 1/8-mile block alone there are 12, and half of the block is commercial! Consider yourself very lucky you are where you are. It's an exception.
And yes, we have Comcast HD. Both direct through the cable box as well as the HDs sent in the clear direct to the TV. They both suck compared to OTA and my neighbor's DTV setup.
Considering that your two second latency on satellite HSI is due to utterly different delivery mechanisms (you know, that whole two-way communications thing where the request has to travel out and then the requested payload returns), I can only conclude that you have no idea what you are talking about. It's as relevant to this discussion as would be a post about marbles.
By the way, "packet loss" in video delivery is corrected by the forward error correction built into the delivery standard. There is plenty of it in a cable plant, too.
There seem to be a lot of things you can't "simply see".
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
| reply to Rick
WTF are you talking about Rick? Satellite internet and satellite tv are two completely different beasts. Latency has nothing to do with satellite tv pq. Satellite TV broadcasts the same signal all over the U.S. (except spot beams for locals), so the only bandwidth issues would be if they wanted to add more channels, which is not really a problem anymore due to the fact that both satellite companies are launching satellites aggressively. Cable definitely has the disadvantage when it comes to bandwidth. If a cable system wants to increase its capacity to 1ghz, they have to send out teams of workers to make sure every node, tap, splitter, and cable that exists on their system can pass signals up to 1ghz (I bet you didn't know that most comcast systems are 750mhz, with many older ones making it only to 450mhz). If the satellite companies want to add more hd, all they have to do is launch a new satellite (which I admit that isn't very cheap, but definitely much faster and easier than upgrading an entire system.) Satellite internet has the latency and the bandwidth limitations because many different users are requesting many different things at once (and I'll admit that satellite internet sucks, while I currently have comcast HSI which is great IMO), unlike satellite tv where every channel is a constant stream of data. How can you even say that satellite HD picture quality is second rate? Have you even seen the new MPEG4 channels that directv broadcasts? Probably not. You obviously have no clue how television broadcasts are delivered to your home. And btw, the only channels that are delivered to comcast via direct fiber are locals, which even then are usually received via off-air antenna. All of those other "cable" channels are delivered by satellite. |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to RadioDoc
Well put...
I've been looking for 'decent' comparisons between
A) Satellite (I'm on DirecTv, and basically have no real issues - it just works 99.999% of the time)
B) Cable (TimeWarner here, was Comcast before)
C) AT&T Uverse IPTV
D) OTA (I'm a little far for OTA HD)
AT&T Uverse is probably not in it for me until they can ensure reliability/uptime.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
 AlakarFacts do not cease to exist when ignored
join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI | reply to Rick
said by Rick:said by RadioDoc:Maybe you need a new TV to see what a good HD picture looks like. I have a great new HD Samsung set together with a great bose 901 surround sound system. And, the picture delivered via comcast hd is awesome. Perhaps it's people with lesser setups who are having the problems because I'm certainly not. There is no such thing as a "bose 901 surround sound system". Bose 901's are speakers that came out in 1968, long before digital sound encoding or surround systems. They are not included in any Bose Home Theater System, and wouldn't work properly if hooked up to a surround system.
You want to try again?
--
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom; it is the arguments of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt the Younger |
|
 PiggieI Actually use WindstreamPremium
join:2005-11-23
Orange Springs, FL | reply to Rick
said by Rick:It has been shown here at bbr time and time again..the problems people complain about with satellite service. And it's very noticeable with satellite hsi service. The lag..and the latency is what they get. And that SAME thing is what is delivering their over compressed hd pictures. So what are you arguing? The picture or HSI? This thread started on the picture quality I believe. What does picture quality have to do with lag?
If you watch live tv like the news then they are linked to their studios with sat.
And you can buy a bigger dish, but seldom is it worth it.
I am thunderstorm city in FL and only if a 40,000 to 50,000 feet giant thunderhead gets between me and bird do I loose signal. They seldom last more than 5 minutes. We watched directv off a generator during the hurricanes of 2004, and only lost signal briefly when a feeder band passed over, but were very capable of monitoring the hurricane via directv local channels. Everything was fine until a branch turned my dish into scrap metal, but at least it missed the house!
It also depends which sat service you are talking about. The new birds on Directv on HD use MPEG4.
Like Radio Doc says, lets take this over to AVS and see what turns up? Dare ya! |
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | Picture quality has EVERYTHING to do with lag.
Who here hasn't seen the complaints coming from the satellite HSI crowd among BBR?
The HUGE lags..the HUGE packet loss that is associated with that service.
Do you all think that somehow the HDTV PICTURE doesn't come from them satellites IN OUTER SPACE?
That is the problem with the hsi technology..and that is the problem with people getting their hdtv off of some small satellite dish strapped to the side of their chimney.
There is NO WAY..in a million years, I'll EVER buy the argument that that is a better delivery system for hd video than the kind delivered by either fiber/coax or FTTH.
To buy that would suggest that satellite HSI is better than HSI service delivered via the cable co's or Verizon.
And we ALL know that isn't true.
Doc and others above seem to be putting this huge reliance on what a group of writers at some forum have written.
I am STARING at the picture..and I don't need any writers to tell me what I'm seeing.
And what I am seeing is AWESOME in quality contrary to the smoke being blown in this forum by people who don't even HAVE the service.
I have a top notch samsung hdtv/surround system and I am staring at it..and at the picture being presented in the article and going..HUH? These people must be smoking crack if that's what they're presenting as the picture quality.
AGAIN..I think it's great that people have access to what they want..and feel is best for them at the price point they're comfortable with. But having seen COUNTLESS systems and setups..I have yet to see anything that ever has convinced me that Satellites is the better picture.
I think the facts support that..as does the delivery system.
And anyone who believes that it does might as well sign up for Satellite HSI as well and enjoy your 2000ms pings and packet loss.
Because that's what you're going to get with satellite..and
it's the same satellites out in orbit that will be delivering your picture to you as well.
As for me..I have no intention of going to outer space to get my HD picture.
My fiber/coax line delivering it to me suits me just fine.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
 SplitpairPremium
join:2000-07-29
Cow Towne
kudos:3 |
said by Rick:As for me..I have no intention of going to outer space to get my HD picture. Really and where do you think Comcast gets the signal from? Ever heard of Galaxy 3, 4R, 5 and 26 or how about AMC 3, 15, 16? Those are all satellites that Comcast receives non-compressed HDTV from which they process and compress to the point it barely qualifies as TV nor less HDTV.
What you fail to realize is each of 24 C band transponders and the 32 Ku transponders on a bird can carry 45 meg + of signal giving a single bird way more capacity than a cable system can carry. Since the CATV operators cannot pass that much signal to their customers they chop a lot of it out in a scheme known as compression which is not lossless leaving the cable customer with considerably less that what was first broadcast.
A simple side by side comparison of an OTA HDTV broadcast and CATV HDTV signal makes for a clear demonstration of just how badly CATV compresses the signal.
Wayne
--
Yeah, there's a storm on the loose, sirens in my head
Wrapped up in silence, all circuits are dead
Cannot decode - my whole life spins into a frenzy
|
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
3 edits | Oh please. Let's stop comparing the dishes people have strapped to their porches with the cable co's MONSTER satellites pulling feeds in. And, that is CERTAINLY not the only source they're getting their feeds from and have direct feeds coming from the broadcasters as well.
BTW...here's the cable co's satellites that the let's distort the facts crowd would have you believe is comparable to home users residential service. |
|
SplitpairPremium
join:2000-07-29
Cow Towne
kudos:3 |
said by Rick:Oh please. Let's stop comparing the dishes people have strapped to their porches with the cable co's MONSTER satellites pulling feeds in. Not comparing the type of dish used just the fact that if one doesn't want HDTV from space getting it through CATV does not cut out receiving it from a satellite.
BTW those dishes shown are at best 4-6 meters which is under the recommended minimum size of 10 meters which is required to pull in a good quality Ku signal during conditions of rain fade. As such that Comcast head end will experience rain fade and LOS from time to time just like the pizza dish owners.
Wayne
--
Yeah, there's a storm on the loose, sirens in my head
Wrapped up in silence, all circuits are dead
Cannot decode - my whole life spins into a frenzy
|
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
4 edits | reply to Alakar
Try again?
OK.
"These speakers are an appropriate choice for use with your surround sound receiver"
»www.thrillingaudio.com/bose-901-speakers
I have 4 of the walnut ones plus another center channel speaker and it sure surrounds me with great sound!
Anyways..now that you've learned something today..start saving up your paper route money. 4+ grand or so for the sound system alone and you too can have the best. |
|
SplitpairPremium
join:2000-07-29
Cow Towne
kudos:3
1 edit | reply to Rick
EchoStar 5 |
said by Rick:BTW...here's the cable co's satellites that the let's distort the facts crowd would have you believe is comparable to home users residential service. BTW those things in the picture are not satellites but are dishes pointed at satellites. 
Pictured above is a satellite. Satellites have dishes but dishes do not have satellites.
Wayne
--
Yeah, there's a storm on the loose, sirens in my head
Wrapped up in silence, all circuits are dead
Cannot decode - my whole life spins into a frenzy
|
|
RickPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT | lol.
Amazing that you felt the need to point that out.
But..I guess when you're trying to compare grandma's residential dish with a cable co's..you have precious little else to try to dig up out of my posts. 
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to Rick
said by Rick:Oh please. Let's stop comparing the dishes people have strapped to their porches with the cable co's MONSTER satellites pulling feeds in. And, that is CERTAINLY not the only source they're getting their feeds from and have direct feeds coming from the broadcasters as well. BTW...here's the cable co's satellites that the let's distort the facts crowd would have you believe is comparable to home users residential service. Im just curious but do you even have an understanding of radio frequencies ? The size of a dish or antenna means nothing compared to what it's designed to catch.
Those small dishes are designed to catch a different frequency then a big dish , the power levels and snr and others are what really matters for reception.
Your argument is like saying your cell phone sucks because it has a nub for an antenna but your car radio is great because it has a huge antenna.
They are set up for different things !
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
