how-to block ads
|
s4v8
join:2005-04-28 | [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? Noticed that the following channels are no longer available through clear QAM:
Food
TBS
ESPN2
Discovery HD
Animal Planet
A&E
CNN HD
LMN HD
TLC HD
Is this a sign of upcoming changes in the Boston area? | |
|  | | | kshakir
join:2006-05-01
Somerville, MA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? When I saw I lost my clear-QAM HD this morning, I hoped it meant Somerville had caught up to Boston, but sadly no. I guess I'll keep waiting for July.
One thing I also don't understand- What does QAM encryption have to do with removing analog channels, or reducing bandwidth (without extra compression)? If anyone can explain it, thanks in advance! | |
| | | moulder3
join:2007-05-21
Boston, MA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by kshakir  :When I saw I lost my clear-QAM HD this morning, I hoped it meant Somerville had caught up to Boston, but sadly no. I guess I'll keep waiting for July. Boston is in the same boat as you. Only Newton (and surrounding areas) have HD channels 184-200. | |
| | | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA
1 edit | said by kshakir :One thing I also don't understand- What does QAM encryption have to do with removing analog channels, or reducing bandwidth (without extra compression)? If anyone can explain it, thanks in advance! It has absolutely nothing to do with removing analog or reducing bandwith. RCN decided that instead of offering Clear Qam channels to its subscribers as a competitive advantage, they were going to encrypt everything and offer more channels. Especially in the Boston Area where we have 3 providers. Its kind of short sighted in my opinion. If RCN feels they can afford to risk alienating any customers, so be it. | |
| | | | nycityny
Premium
join:2005-08-09
New York, NY
 ·PHONE POWER
·VoicePulse
 ·RCN CABLE
·ViaTalk
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by mrbigk :said by kshakir :One thing I also don't understand- What does QAM encryption have to do with removing analog channels, or reducing bandwidth (without extra compression)? If anyone can explain it, thanks in advance! It has absolutely nothing to do with removing analog or reducing bandwith. RCN decided that instead of offering Clear Qam channels to its subscribers as a competitive advantage, they were going to encrypt everything and offer more channels. Especially in the Boston Area where we have 3 providers. Its kind of short sighted in my opinion. If RCN feels they can afford to risk alienating any customers, so be it. Isn't it ostensibly for security reasons that they are encrypting everything? They don't want folks to "steal" the signal from them anymore.
I personally think it is a bogus argument. One reason I went with RCN 11 years ago is that a cable box was not required for non-premium channels, vs such a requirement with Time Warner. Now the positions seem to be switching with RCN encrypting everything. | |
| | | | | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA
2 edits | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? I find that having the ability on one of the other tvs in the house that having the "basic hd channels(not just locals as it has been for years)" via clear qam is fine. Hell, the cable companies going RCN's route offer no competitive advantage vs. satelite if all tv's require a box. This means that RCN, Comcast, Verizon, Direct TV and Dish Network will all require boxes. Price is a very important factor for RCN now. | |
| | | | | | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? I Hope they realize Clear Qam was there competitive advantage in Boston. | |
| | | | | | moulder3
join:2007-05-21
Boston, MA
| said by mrbigk :I find that having the ability on one of the other tvs in the house that having the "basic hd channels(not just locals as it has been for years)" via clear qam is fine. Hell, the cable companies going RCN's route offer no competitive advantage vs. satelite if all tv's require a box. This means that RCN, Comcast, Verizon, Direct TV and Dish Network will all require boxes. Price is a very important factor for RCN now. I'd go one step further and suggest this tips the advantage to Dish and DirecTV, since their boxes have RF modulators. You can set up the boxes at your coax entrance point to the house, and have the second tuner work anywhere in the house, via a UHF remote.
This is why (in my opinion) RCN needs to step it up with their STBs. Their Motorola boxes STILL can't use passive HD (you have to choose between 720p or 1080i) and you can't use the second tuner for either PIP or as an output for a second tv. | |
| | | | | | | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by moulder3 :I'd go one step further and suggest this tips the advantage to Dish and DirecTV, since their boxes have RF modulators. You can set up the boxes at your coax entrance point to the house, and have the second tuner work anywhere in the house, via a UHF remote. This is why (in my opinion) RCN needs to step it up with their STBs. Their Motorola boxes STILL can't use passive HD (you have to choose between 720p or 1080i) and you can't use the second tuner for either PIP or as an output for a second tv. Yeah, I have a hard time giving RCN or any cable company an advantage if the one of the main advantages cable has had is not requireing a box on every tv. If that goes, then yes, the scale would seem to favor the satelite companies. VOD is not reason alone to go with RCN. | |
| | | | | | | | 
rcnman
Jason Nealis
Premium,VIP
join:2003-05-02
Herndon, VA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by mrbigk :said by moulder3 :I'd go one step further and suggest this tips the advantage to Dish and DirecTV, since their boxes have RF modulators. You can set up the boxes at your coax entrance point to the house, and have the second tuner work anywhere in the house, via a UHF remote. This is why (in my opinion) RCN needs to step it up with their STBs. Their Motorola boxes STILL can't use passive HD (you have to choose between 720p or 1080i) and you can't use the second tuner for either PIP or as an output for a second tv. Yeah, I have a hard time giving RCN or any cable company an advantage if the one of the main advantages cable has had is not requireing a box on every tv. If that goes, then yes, the scale would seem to favor the satelite companies. VOD is not reason alone to go with RCN. By going all digital it allows us to deploy a large amount of HD channels. This wouldn't be possible if we maintained a large analog lineup.
--
Jason Nealis,
Sr. Director, Video Product and Network Operations | |
| | | | | | | | | 
tigrzeye
Control4 Certified Installer
join:2007-07-18
LHV, PA
1 edit | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? I prefer better quality of picture so I SUPPORT the digital upgrade and more HD channels in an uncompressed format. I tried DirecTv for approximately 3 hours, saw the poor quality of picture and canceled immediately so as not to incur a penalty charge.
I DO NOT support RCN's position on going all digital with encryption and requiring separate STB's for each TV. But I think we are beating a dead horse.. RCN has made their decision and they don't care if we like it or not. The box rental fees and extra cost programming tiers mean revenue. If others are like myself, I don't have another choice in cable companies.
A rumor .. you only get the free digital STB and special rates for 2nd and 3rd boxes if you have NO STB's currently. If you already have a DVR, HD box, etc. then you don't qualify for the free and reduced rate STB's. It appears the free STB is being offered as an appeasement for basic cable subscribers that would lose their tv programming completely. I read this elsewhere, could RCN confirm or deny this here on the forum? | |
| | | | | | | | | billymac
join:2008-05-16
01802
| said by rcnman :By going all digital it allows us to deploy a large amount of HD channels. This wouldn't be possible if we maintained a large analog lineup. Which is unrelated to encryption.... | |
| | | | | | | | | billymac
join:2008-05-16
01802
| said by rcnman :By going all digital it allows us to deploy a large amount of HD channels. This wouldn't be possible if we maintained a large analog lineup. Any announcements on the added HD channels that we will get after the conversion? The list posted earlier for the current Chicago lineup doesn't have any more HD than currently available in Boston (except the MDU people) | |
| | | | | | | | | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA
| said by rcnman :By going all digital it allows us to deploy a large amount of HD channels. This wouldn't be possible if we maintained a large analog lineup. I am not saying you shouldn't go digital, but clear qam should be treated like a "cable ready" tv. I have 3 soon to be 4 HDTV's. Been replacing the older tvs as they falter. You want to switch to digital fine. But encrypting everything is an excuse for offering more content. Encrypting channels that may be in a higher tier is fine as well. But the basic package should get the digital equivalent of what we get now. The only reason I can see to do it is to increase box rentals/ possible VOD. | |
| | | | | | | | | moulder3
join:2007-05-21
Boston, MA
| quote:
rcnman: By going all digital it allows us to deploy a large amount of HD channels. This wouldn't be possible if we maintained a large analog lineup.
Well, that's only half true... RCN could go all digital and NOT encrypt the channels, if you wanted. It's not that you're going all-digital that is the issue with most people on this board. We understand it's necessary to do that to add HD. But it's a bait-and-switch when you say you have to take away UNENCRYPTED analog and replace it with ENCRYPTED digital!! There's no reason not to keep digital channels in the clear, except that you want $$$ for box rentals. I think you guys should be honest about it, at least! I pay $100 a month for TV, and am less than thrilled I'll need to rent additional boxes, despite having QAM tuners in my tvs. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
rcnman
Jason Nealis
Premium,VIP
join:2003-05-02
Herndon, VA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by moulder3 : quote:
rcnman: By going all digital it allows us to deploy a large amount of HD channels. This wouldn't be possible if we maintained a large analog lineup.
Well, that's only half true... RCN could go all digital and NOT encrypt the channels, if you wanted. It's not that you're going all-digital that is the issue with most people on this board. We understand it's necessary to do that to add HD. But it's a bait-and-switch when you say you have to take away UNENCRYPTED analog and replace it with ENCRYPTED digital!! There's no reason not to keep digital channels in the clear, except that you want $$$ for box rentals. I think you guys should be honest about it, at least! I pay $100 a month for TV, and am less than thrilled I'll need to rent additional boxes, despite having QAM tuners in my tvs. Most deals with our providers (non-broadcast) have in the contract the channel must be encrypted. This is true for most if not all cable companies.
--
Jason Nealis,
Sr. Director, Video Product and Network Operations | |
| | | | | | | | | |
tigrzeye
Control4 Certified Installer
join:2007-07-18
LHV, PA | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? We receive non-broadcast digital tier channels now that are not encrypted. Are these new, just penned contracts you speak of?? | |
| | | | | | | | | | moulder3
join:2007-05-21
Boston, MA
| Wow, I didn't know most non-broadcast channels required encryption...I apologize for the rant then, rcnman!
This just leads me to thinking we need a-la-carte channels even QUICKER! I know some people disagree, but I think most advertiser-supported channels would quickly reduce their carriage fees, once they felt the massive loss of customers (which is how cable companies determine ad revenue), not viewership.
I think it's pretty crazy that (in our current setup) we all have to pay for channels like USA network that air tons of ads AND edit every movie they show. To me, I'd drop just about every basic channel except the ESPNs (which, I know, is expensive) and simply buy premium channels!
...I know everyone is different, though. That's the whole point of a la carte! | |
| billymac
join:2008-05-16
01802 | The removed WLVIDT & WSBKDT too. The only thing left on HD clear QAM is the 4 major's and PBS.
This is crap. I guess I'm calling Comcast on Monday | |
| billymac
join:2008-05-16
01802 | So they removed the clearQAM HD and they have no HD cable boxes available in Boston. I was told to call back next week. Nice move. I guess I'm just SOL for the Celtics game. | |
| |
rcnman
Jason Nealis
Premium,VIP
join:2003-05-02
Herndon, VA | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? Check again...  | |
|
tigrzeye
Control4 Certified Installer
join:2007-07-18
LHV, PA
| In the long scheme of things the reason I have always had cable (when it is an option) is that I didn't need to have a box for every tv in the house like you do for satellite programming. Now I still have cable because in my experience, certainly not an expert one, I find the cable picture to be superior to the DirecTv picture. The cost of satellite programming and their equipment is certainly a plus, and right now here in the Lehigh Valley, they certainly have the HD advantage with a bunch more channels available.
Since more and more people ARE heading towards satellite tv viewing it is making the playing field less dependent on that no need for a box advantage cable tv had. Cable is seeing that they can create revenue and limit the number of "free" televisions hanging off of consumer added splitters. With needing STB's for every tv in the house, they can control and garner additional revenue.
The competition satellite tv created has had a negative effect. They can do it, so why can't we is what cable is possibly thinking. We the consumer certainly lost this time. | |
| | 
rcbrcb
Premium
join:2007-02-21
Chicago, IL
 ·DIRECTV
·RCN CABLE
·T-Mobile VoIP
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·T-Mobile US
| Trust me when I say this discussion is not going to change the minds of the Brain Trust at RCN. We beat the issue into them when they did the Analog Crush here in Chicago about the HD QAM channels and they would not budge. As long as they provide the SD version of the local channels in the clear on QAM, they are in compliance with FCC rules, nothing else HAS to be delivered "In the Clear".
This is, of course, a revenue based decision on RCN's part. The encryption of the HD QAM channels has NOTHING to do with regaining bandwidth, but everything to do with requiring the rental to STB's to its customers. I am all for the switch to full digital, as it has brought me many more HD channels, which is GREAT. But the encryption of the HD QAM Channels is straight BS on RCN's part.
I swiched to only Series 3 HD Tivo's after the Analog Crush and only pay RCN $4.50 total per month for the 3 Cable Cards. I simply did'nt want to pay RCN for the equipment every month and besides that, their equipment is garbage anyway! The only thing I lost was the abilty to have VOD, which in the 9 years I have been with RCN, I had not used ONCE! | |
| 
KungFu_Toe
@pg.com
| I've lost TBS HD, FOOD HD, CW HD, and HGTV HD. If RCN is not willing to negotiate with providers regarding clear QAM, then they will lose the one market advantage that they have over Comcast. Also, there is no need to encrypt every channel just because of the one or two providers who insist on encrypting their channels. I will be switching to Direct TV, once Microsoft's Media Center adds support for it. On that note, I'd be interested to see what happened to RCN's customer base in Chicago when they started encrypting everything. | |
| | | | | E512N
join:2007-05-22
Chicago, IL
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by rcbrcb :Since RCN has made the move, Comcats is now beginning to do the same in Chicago. It's kinda like when one airline raises their rates, the others follow. I appreciate the tinfoil hat sentiment here, but have you considered the possibility that RCN (and particularly the responsive, helpful employees who have for years supported the people on this forum) might actually have been telling us the truth? And that now it's a matter of Comcast also dealing with the same content licensing/access/encryption protocols required by the content providers?
I don't know what the real story is - and yeah, I'm still annoyed at the encryption - but I find it far more likely that the upstream content providers are the ones behind this. The whole DRM stupidity, broadcast kill flag nonsense, etc. would pretty much align with a move toward requiring providers to encrypt content. Just wait for the "thou shalt not skip commercials" nonsense. That's all the networks old-skool licensing model protection and inability to adapt to a changing ad revenue model. | |
| | | | billymac
join:2008-05-16
01802
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by E512N :said by rcbrcb :Since RCN has made the move, Comcats is now beginning to do the same in Chicago. It's kinda like when one airline raises their rates, the others follow. I appreciate the tinfoil hat sentiment here, but have you considered the possibility that RCN (and particularly the responsive, helpful employees who have for years supported the people on this forum) might actually have been telling us the truth? And that now it's a matter of Comcast also dealing with the same content licensing/access/encryption protocols required by the content providers? I don't know what the real story is - and yeah, I'm still annoyed at the encryption - but I find it far more likely that the upstream content providers are the ones behind this. The whole DRM stupidity, broadcast kill flag nonsense, etc. would pretty much align with a move toward requiring providers to encrypt content. Just wait for the "thou shalt not skip commercials" nonsense. That's all the networks old-skool licensing model protection and inability to adapt to a changing ad revenue model. I am thankful for those that monitor this forum. It is nice to have people that can answer questions intelligibly and not have to call a support line.
However, encrypting local HD's is not being pushed by the upstream providers. They give away their signal for free. Actually, they invest a lot of money so that people can get their signal. I can't see them being happy about a carry limiting the number of viewers that can see their channel.
I actually wonder what the local station's opinion on this issue is. I think I start sending a few emails and see what results.
Billy | |
| | | | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA
| said by [bquote= rcbrcb :I don't know what the real story is - and yeah, I'm still annoyed at the encryption - but I find it far more likely that the upstream content providers are the ones behind this. The whole DRM stupidity, broadcast kill flag nonsense, etc. would pretty much align with a move toward requiring providers to encrypt content. Just wait for the "thou shalt not skip commercials" nonsense. That's all the networks old-skool licensing model protection and inability to adapt to a changing ad revenue model. Do you really believe PBS is requiring their HD signal to be encrypted? | |
| | | | |
foom
@rcn.com
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by mrbigk :Do you really believe PBS is requiring their HD signal to be encrypted? Well, if you call RCN they'll try to convince you that the FCC is requiring them to encrypt the channels, and that's obviously complete bull****. They obviously don't care about truth here...
Also, btw, pretty much all channels are now gone.
As of now, only 2-22, 160, 162, 163, 164, 166, 83 (local access), 153, and 173 are available.
I assume the remaining channels other than 2-22 will be disappearing soon now. (Note that although phone tech support claimed 2-22 and 83-98 would be the only channels left unencrypted, most of the channels in the 83-98 range have in fact become encrypted now..)
To make matters worse, RCN has shown their utter contempt for me as their customer by so far failing to even bother to reply to the email I sent to cabletv@rcn.com last Thursday. Bravo. | |
| | | | | |
foom
@rcn.com | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? Did anyone get any notice from RCN that they'd be shutting off their QAM channels?
I don't recall getting any notice, but maybe I just missed it? | |
| | | | | | | dworsky
join:2004-10-29
Somerville, MA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? No notice from RCN. In Somerville, I lost almost all SD stations yesterday, and even CBS-HD was cut out last week or the week before.
Now the only things left are NBC-HD, ABC-HD, PBS-HD, FOX-HD, and a few only foreign language and shopping channels.
UGG! | |
|
Paul_Brookline
@rcn.com
| All non-network QAM channels in Brookline were encrypted yesterday, including several local channels as well as WGBH World and WGBH Create (local PBS sub-channels).
I've reported RCN's unannounced policy change to the Mass. Dept. of telecommunications and Cable (www.state.ma.us), my town's broadband monitoring committee, the consumer affairs reporter at WCVB, the FCC and the Federal Trade Commission.
If large numbers of customers from multiple cities complain, something may change.
I am particularly annoyed because I asked the RCN sales rep. specific, detailed questions to ensure that I would not need a cable box. I purchased a Samsung HDTV based on the assurance I received from RCN that a QAM tuner would enable me to receive all my expanded basic programming.
I would not have ordered RCN service if I knew that a cable box was required for every TV in my house - a backdoor way of doubling my cable bill.
Even today, RCN has not provided any customer notice of changes to our service. I have no way of knowing if equipment purchased today will be usable a week from now, or if analog programming I view on my old TV will suddenly disappear. | |
| |
See 11 replies to this post | |
| |
See 27 replies to this post | |
jhlmsln
join:2005-05-01
Washington, DC
| Some people are still moaning and groaning about
RCN new business model even after they have said
that they are quiting or have quit. Talk about
beating a dead horse. If the new business model
will allow more HD CHANNELS at a reasonable cost - GREAT.
There is no law that says you have to have CABLE.
This is just my opinion. You know the old saying-
"opinions are like assholes,everyone has one"
jhl | |
| | dworsky
join:2004-10-29
Somerville, MA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? I just got my May RCN bill today, and there NO NOTICE about going all digital in Massachusetts. In fact, all it had was the insert about the BROADCAST analog transition, which in relevant part says:
"If all your televisions are connected to the RCN network, this change will not affect you. You will continue to receive the same high-quality service and programming that you receive today."
Ha. | |
| arlington
join:2008-03-03
| All my bill had was this:
"On June 1,2008 RCN will be moving their
Digital Music and Pay Per View channels.
Please go to the following locations to
continue to receive these programs.
RCNDigital Music - Channels 851-895
Pay Per View Events - 911
Adult Pay Per View - 915 - 919
MLB Extra Innings - 941 - 954
These changes will not interrupt any of
your services and we hope you enjoy our
Digital Music and Pay Per View in their new
locations". | |
|
l008com
@rcn.com
1 edit |
If enough customers make enough of a stink, they may change their mind, at least about some channels. It probably won't do anything, but I figure what the hell. If enough people join, and we add this to the stink everyone else is making. Maybe just maybe they'll listen.
I sure hope RCN doesn't "Comcast" us. :-( | |
| boble88
join:2001-12-20
Somerville, MA | Forgive my ignorance but, is using the QAM tuner to receive HD channels a way of not having to pay for the HD channels? If so, is that a form of stealing cable service? | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
boble88
join:2001-12-20
Somerville, MA
·RCN CABLE
| Digital converter box (not HD)is $2.95 per month and $5.95 for each additional box. This price is not unreasonable or too high. I was never given the opportunity to receive "free HD" from RCN. My 1st HD ready TV is a 36" Sony Vega (tube) which needed an HD converter. My 2nd is a 40" Sony XBR, which has a QAM tuner. RCN must charge for its services if not then they can close their doors. Again, using a QAM tuner to receive an HD signal is in effect "stealing". If an RCN representative wants to weigh in on this please do so.
I have had many issues with RCN starting with that disaster of changing the software in the boxes. The old software allowing us to access VOD etc is still much better in my mind. People, please price out Comcast vs RCN and tell me if paying $50 to $100 extra per month is worth it. Go over to the Comcast forums and tell me how much "fun" they are having with Comcast or the problems Verizon is having with their "Fios". 2 HD boxes (one is a DVR) plus one digital box, all channels including including HBO, Showtime etc etc, 20 Mbps down and unlimited long and local telephone service for $152.16 (includes all taxes). Do I love RCN? Absolutely not, they are a cable company and everyone despises the "Cable Company". | |
| |
Paul_Brookline
@rcn.com
3 edits | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? said by boble88 : Again, using a QAM tuner to receive an HD signal is in effect "stealing". "in effect"?! Have you actually read any of the posts on this thread? Here's a quote, cut and pasted from RCN's web site:
A wide array of HD channels are FREE with no additional channel fees. Their printed brochures make the same claim.
[Extranneous commentary removed by moderator]
RCN, as several of us have pointed out, is not just encrypting HD channels. They are encrypting ALL THEIR PROGRAMMING, most of which is NOT HD We are angry about increased fees imposed to receive programming that we already pay for. | |
| | | 
lilhurricane
Crunchin' For Cures
Premium,Mod
join:2003-01-11
Purple Zone
clubs:  | Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? Watch the insults Paul.
Feel free to attack the issues as much as you'd like - not the members. | |
| | | | | | | |
anon1
@comcast.net | Paul, Im sure this is concerning only tv's you have rented a HD box on. "A wide array of HD channels are FREE with no additional channel fees." | |
| | billymac
join:2008-05-16
01802
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? RCN QAM was in the clear for their extended basic channels and their associated HD channels, but not any HD channels on digital vision. They knew what was encrypted and what wasn't encrypted. To say that it was stealing is ridiculous in my opinion. Now if I canceled and they never disconnected, and I still watched, that would be stealing. But to say that as a paying customer, plugging in a cable to my TV and auto programming the stations is stealing, that's crazy. RCN has never accused anyone of stealing in this manner to the best of my knowledge. It's really no different than plugging in an analog TV set and tuning the analog channels these days.
Just about every other cable company in the nation does not encrypt any of the local broadcasts, either in HD or SD, allowing them to be tuned with a simple QAM tuner. This includes the "screw you every which way possible" big cable companies. Most do encrypt the non broadcast QAM channels.
I really can't see the light in RCN's decision. The analog crush does give them a competitive advantage over other cable companies by freeing up space for more HD and such. So that makes sense. I think Verizon is handling it better by giving 3 free DCT700's per subscriber, whereas I haven't even seen anything official mailed to me from RCN regarding the forthcoming analog crush.
But if the QAM encryption only affected a negligible amount of subscribers, how much revenue do they plan to gain? | |
| boble88
join:2001-12-20
Somerville, MA
·RCN CABLE
| Sorry for the "It's stealing" comment. Yes I can read and Lil I do not feel insulted (will take more than a comment to do that). RCN along with Comcast, Verizon, Direct TV, Dish, Time Warner etc etc. all charge for HD reception. If not a separate charge then one that is built into the "digital tier".
Based on the services I receive from RCN and what my monthly bill is including taxes, has anyone here priced what Comcast or Verizon charges for the exact same? Verizon is not in Somerville, Comcast is. I did price out what I would pay Verizon if I lived in their service area and what I would pay Comcast for the same services in my city. If either one charged less I would not be discussing this with you today, I would be in a Comcast or Verizon forum talking about how bad they suck.
I hope that RCN stays in business and can continue to compete with the "Big Boys" if not, my cable bill will be outrageous and I will have to drop some of the services I receive today.
That said, where are my new "HD channels" in Somerville? Plus, RCN I am begging you to go back to the software you used before the "Great Crash" for the VOD functions etc etc. | |
| boble88
join:2001-12-20
Somerville, MA
·RCN CABLE
| Although I do detest the "Cable Companies", I feel as if I must come to RCNs' aid in this QAM tuner matter. This info is copied and pasted directly from the RCN web site under HD FAQs.
What is the difference between HD-ready and HD-capable televisions?
HD-ready television sets have the HD decoder (converter box) built in, while HD-capable sets do not have the converter box built into the unit. Currently, customers with HD-ready or HD-capable sets will still need to rent a converter box from RCN. | |
| | mrbigk
join:2004-01-22
Natick, MA
| Re: [CATV] Clear QAM channels slowly disappearing in Boston? Just to make things easier for people. RCN origionally had the hd tier, (you payed extra) in Boston, I think only the local stations were in the clear unencrypted, ESPN & NESN was encrypted, they got rid of the hd tier, ESPN & NESN came unencrypted. They added hd stations after that and the ones that were digital vision were encrypted and the ones that were not, ie had a counterpart on expanded basic cable were not. People defending RCN should remember that RCN started providing additional channels "in the clear" around 5ish, maybe more years ago. And if people want to complain about them changing what they provide to their customers, customers should feel free to express their displeasure about what RCN is changing. Just like how some people praised RCN for allowing more clear cam than the other providers in their town (with the switch for me, Verizon and Comcast at least offer all the TV stations sd and hd in the clear, where RCN now will not)
RCN could of mitigated some of the customer anger like Verizon did by providing 3 free "digital adapters", which I believe are the DCT 700 boxes for their current subscribers. But RCN isn't doing that either so if people want to complain, I think this forum is a good place for people to air whatever their concerns are, whether its technical related or changes in company policy. | |
|
tigrzeye
Control4 Certified Installer
join:2007-07-18
LHV, PA
| I have 5 telephones in my house and use RCN .. will they be charging separately for each phone soon? If you network your computers and modem, will they charge for each computer you access the internet with??
PS ....I hate to think that I just gave RCN a new avenue of charges with this post. SO RCN PLEASE COVER YOUR EYES !!! | |
| boble88
join:2001-12-20
Somerville, MA
·RCN CABLE
| Does Comcast charge for HD? Copied and pasted from their web site.
HD programming from ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX and PBS is available in selected areas. Comparative claims based upon areas where HDTV from Comcast is available. To receive HD features and benefits an HD television (not provided), HD box and remote control are required. Advertised channels/stations generally provide a mix of HD and non-HD programming. HD programming is limited to the programming provided to Comcast in HDTV format by the programming provider. Programming and charges subject to change. Basic service subscription is required to receive HDTV and premium HDTV channel requires subscription to underlying premium channel. Call Comcast for details and restrictions. Installation fees may vary.
All this for $8.99 per month
Comcast is saying an HD cable box is required to receive HD signals. | |
| |
See 12 replies to this post | |
| | |
|
