 | | competition the american way that's the spirit, don't compete on price, product or service - sue their @sses! | |
|
 |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: competition the american way said by nasadude:that's the spirit, don't compete on price, product or service - sue their @sses! Well as a consumer if a company is promoting something that is not true, hell yes I'd sue. Say what you mean and mean what you say. DirectTVs HD isn't even REAL HD anyways. It's called HD Lite. So I'm not sure how they are going to offer 100X more channels when the 6-8 they offer aren't even in real HD. | |
|
| | |
| | |  NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | Re: competition the american way Care to prove HD Lite is FUD?
I've seen plenty examples to prove that the satellite providers dumb down the signal to skimp on used bandwidth.
--
Ubuntu Tips »www.ubuntutips.org | |
|
| | | |  DaSneaky1Done wall to block them allPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter
| Re: competition the american way I'm not saying re-sampling is not happening. Saying that any re-sampling is totally destroys the picture is FUD. The quality (of course, totally subjective) is fine.
And what's wrong with trying to conserve bandwidth? Unlike terrestrial services, you can't really upgrade bandwidth to space too easily.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: | |
|
| | | | |  thender2Glamour ProfessionPremium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY | Re: competition the american way I think it does.
There are a lot of 1080p TVs on the market now.
We already dumb it down enough by using 1080i and 720p, why dumb it down even further? That's another step backwards I don't want to take.
Don't you dare say it's for compatibility purposes, either. Because I know several hundred thousand to millions of people with HDTVs that don't support HDCP that, come bluray/HDDVD time, are going to want their money back.
--
The Problem With Music.
Our Rationale
Time to rewrite the DMCA. | |
|
| | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: competition the american way said by thender2:Don't you dare say it's for compatibility purposes, either. Because I know several hundred thousand to millions of people with HDTVs that don't support HDCP that, come bluray/HDDVD time, are going to want their money back. They can want all they want.
Here's a good example of stupid America. This is the mentality of people who think they are owed believing that. The bottom line is you buy something with a price on it.. you purchased what you did. There is no "I want my money back".. there is no "victim" here.. People spend way too much time finding others to blame for their own lack of care in making choices.
Let them want their money back - I'd simply put them in a category of needing remedial education since they obviously can't function in the real world or reality.
--
"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 | |
|
| | |  dispatcher21911 Where is your emergency?
join:2004-01-22
united state
kudos:1
·Charter
| No, it is not HD. HD is 1280x720 or 1920x1080, not 1280x1080 that Directv is trying to pass as HD. There is no FUD about it, Directv does not offer true HD, but neither does Dishnetwork or many other cable providers. To my knowledge(as a few years ago), only Comcast offers HDTV channels without altering the data stream from the source. | |
|
| | | |  na
@tsaadvet.com | Re: competition the american way said by dispatcher21:No, it is not HD. HD is 1280x720 or 1920x1080, not 1280x1080 that Directv is trying to pass as HD. There is no FUD about it, Directv does not offer true HD, but neither does Dishnetwork or many other cable providers. To my knowledge(as a few years ago), only Comcast offers HDTV channels without altering the data stream from the source. Wrong! Anything over 1280x720 is HD. It doesn't specifically have to be 1280x720 or 1920x1080. Another reason they call it HD lite is because it is bit starved, not necessarily because of the resolution.
»www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t···=hd+lite | |
|
| | | |  PolarBear03The bear formerly known as aaron8301Premium
join:2005-01-03 | Um, have you done some simple math? IF one variety of HD, as you say, is 1280x720 and DirecTV is broadcasting at 1280x1080, isn't that better? 1280x1080 is MORE pixels than 1280x720.
I've seen DirecTV HD channels on dozens of different HDTVs, and I think the quality is excellent. However if you don't, don't complain about it, simply don't subscribe to the service. No one is forcing you to watch DirecTV. The fact that someone will sue simply because they don't like the service is ridiculous. In my experience, if you don't like the service, go with another provider.
--
"I invented it, Bill made it famous." --David Bradley, the inventor of Ctrl+Alt+Del. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: competition the american way If it were 1280x720p vs 1280x1080p, then yes, it would be better. DirectTV apparently broadcasts at 1280x1080i... which pixel wise calculates as 1280x540p. And that, is less than HD resolution, hence the griping.
That's 691,200 pixels per frame (technically, per refresh, but I'm so not going there) on Direct TV, with the lowest standard of HDTV running at 921,600 pixels per refresh.
End result is DirectTV broadcasting at ~%75 percent of the low end of HDTV.
Also, that's not 16x9... that's not even a 4x3 ratio... that some funky 32x27 ratio. Closer to a square than even SDTV. Weird. | |
|
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by DaSneaky1D:"HD Lite" is a concocted term meant to spread FUD. The quality is just fine. EDIT - Yes, resampling is there, but it is nonetheless HD. Incidently, according to Wikipedia, TWC resamples in this fashion as well: » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_lite So what if TWC uses this? I'm not in TWC territory. TWC is not on TV having Dr Brown say how they are going to have 100X more HD capacity when they don't even have the capacity for 8 HD channles NOW. Here's a novel ideal, how about telling me you have 100X the HD capacity WHEN YOU ACTUALLY HAVE IT. | |
|
| | |  lovswr
join:2001-09-15
Smyrna, GA | Yes HD lite is a term of derision used by us customers, but I can assure you the "quality" is not fine at all.
--
lovswr = good hivswr = bad | |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | "3 times the HD of cable. . . ."
I don't think so. HD-LITE is *NOT* HD!
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
| fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | ND,
If your ISP doesn't provide the service for HSI that is advertised, wouldn't you sue? It's the theme around here.
DirecTV is making claims that are just not true. DirecTV is trying ti influence people to leave TWC for them claiming that they can offer more HD than cable.. "three times more"...
1) can they now? No. It's a lie.
2) can they in the future? It remains to be seen. It's possible that TWC may beat DirecTV in offering HD networks. But, in the end, you can't advertise claims on speculation.
This is similar to satellite saying that they are all digital unlike cable. If you notice, those ads started to disappear finally because more and more, cable is becoming all digital. Even with Comcast offering ADS in many systems, Satellite still continued to advertise that cable wasn't all digital.
You can't make claims that aren't true when it damages the business potential of the other guy..
So yes... a law suit is in order.
--
"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 | |
|
bfncbs1
join:2005-11-16
Charlotte Hall, MD | Forgotten DWAY subscribers this is exactly why there so called broadband service is horrible. OVERSUBSCRIBED!!! Speed use to be only a issue at night for direcway now it's all day everyday. The absolute worse service there is. I was a 5 year subscriber to direcway and was happy for the first 4. Now I am a ex customer because of this. Thank god for EVDO.
I know the money is in HD and DTV is banking on the fact that if they can offer it the customers will come. My question is what about the DWAY customers have you forgotten that we pay and average of 59.99 each? Guess so. Pitiful. | |
|
 hobgoblinSortof AgoblinPremium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
kudos:4 | How about the Networks DirecTV Having just moved and traded in a DirectTV system for TWC I am blown away by the Networks in HD. Of course DirectTV never was able to offer the Buffalo Networks.
TWC Line up is way better!
Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
|
1 edit | Battle of Vaporware This is funny.
TWC is Suing DirectTV (D*) because Time Warners's non-existent (Switched Digital Video is not in service yet) is just as capable as DirectTV's non-existent (Satellites aren't even up in space) New HDTV service (not including their existing low capacity offering).
So TWC is suing because their will be is just as good as D*'s could be. If TWC wanted to really smack down D*, they should just point out how terrible the Picture Quality looks on the HDTV channels that DirecTV currently carries. They have decreased the resolution (1280x1080i instead of 1920x1080i) and starved the bandwidth on their HD channels to the extent that they are now referred to as HD-Lite. If TWC or Comcast just drove that point home, they could do some serious damage. | |
|
| | | Re: Battle of Vaporware said by CycloneGT:TWC is Suing DirectTV (D*) because Time Warners's non-existent (Switched Digital Video is not in service yet) is just as capable as DirectTV's non-existent (Satellites aren't even up in space) New HDTV service (not including their existing low capacity offering). I don't know what you are talking about. TWC does have SDV in service (with a couple different solutions) in several markets. With channel expansions having every week. | |
|
| | | said by CycloneGT:TWC is Suing DirectTV (D*) because Time Warners's non-existent (Switched Digital Video is not in service yet) Just because it's not in your area doesn't mean it'd not in service. I have TWC here in SC and they have been using switch digital for months now.
It seems to me that TWC is testing it out in some markets before going company with it. | |
|
| PolarBear03The bear formerly known as aaron8301Premium
join:2005-01-03 | said by CycloneGT:DirectTV's non-existent (Satellites aren't even up in space) New HDTV service In 2006, DirecTV launched two new KA-band satellites for HDTV. I know they are there, as I can get a signal from them with my sat meter and my DirecTV H-20. How is that non-existent?
--
"I invented it, Bill made it famous." --David Bradley, the inventor of Ctrl+Alt+Del. | |
|
| |
1 edit | Re: Battle of Vaporware Those already launched sats are configured with spot beams to provide local channels for each market. They are not the sats intended to deliver the 100 national HD channels DirecTV has been advertising. The sats intended for the 100 national HD channels have yet to be launched. | |
|
| | | PolarBear03The bear formerly known as aaron8301Premium
join:2005-01-03 | Re: Battle of Vaporware OH THAT'S BESIDE THE POINT!
[/sarcasm] | |
|
| | | | | Incorrect.
10 Is launched and in testing, 11 will be launched shortly (its already boxed up and in transit to the pad, should arrive within the next 2 weeks) and those are the two birds that will be providing the HD nationwide feeds. 9 is the one that is providing HD locals and has been in operation since June of last year. In addition the switch to MPEG4 is going to net them an extra HD channel for every two they would have had with MPEG2.
This doesn't include the deal that's in the works with DISH to possibly share bandwidth, possibly by moving all the SD channels to a single shared bird. | |
|
| | | |
3 edits | Really? First get your birds straight. D* 9S is actually an in orbit backup and/or replacement for the 1R, 4S, and 7S birds.said by FCC :
DIRECTV 9S satellite will add to its capacity at the nominal 101º W.L. orbital
location and is intended to replace the DIRECTV 1 satellite’s capacity at this location.22 The
DBS space station of the DIRECTV 9S satellite will be collocated at the nominal 101º W.L.
orbital location with the DIRECTV 1R, DIRECTV 4S, and DIRECTV 8 satellites, where it will
continue to provide national and local-into-local programming to DIRECTV subscribers, and
will also provide redundancy for DIRECTV’s existing DBS satellites. »hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a···93A1.pdf
There is a Ka-band payload on 9S; however, that payload by all accounts is only being used for back-hauling HD locals to D*'s ground station.
HD locals are being provided to the home by Spaceway 1 & Spaceway 2. Here is a listing of HD local channels they currently carry:
»www.lyngsat.com/packages/directvusa99.html
»www.lyngsat.com/packages/directvusa103.html
D10 has not launched yet. It is set to go up on a Proton rocket from Baikonur. Speculation is sometime between May and September.
»www.lyngsat.com/launches/Baikonur.html
D11 is on its way to the pad you say? That is interesting since SeaLaunch is contracted to take D11 into orbit and it is currently busy figuring out why the last rocket exploded. Plus there are two other sats in line ahead of D11.
»www.lyngsat.com/launches/Sea-Launch.html
As to sharing sats with E*. Maybe. However there are always rumors about D* and E* doing things together. The biggest hitch with such a plan is that D* would have to replace my new AU9 HD dish they just installed or even add a second dish to my setup. Not to mention changes to the new HD DVR that might not be able to register E* sats. Along with all the rest of us with the new equipment. | |
|
|
1 edit | quote:
TWC is Suing DirectTV (D*) because Time Warners's non-existent (Switched Digital Video is not in service yet) is just as capable as DirectTV's non-existent (Satellites aren't even up in space) New HDTV service (not including their existing low capacity offering).
You bet your ass it exists. Over 70 channels are currently using SDV on TW Rochester. A&E HD, Universal HD, MHD, Starz Comedy, Boomerang, Logo, Fox Reality Channel and the digital simulcast are all in switched video and all new channels will be that way.
And as far as Cable V DSL. Cable companies should sue the phone companies for disgracing the word broadband. The almighty Verizon has their 3Mb DSL connection and I have real broadband from Time Warner at 15Mb. There is nothing you can do more efficient on a Dead Slow Line connection.
--
Time Warner Cable Subscriber
Digital Cable & Road Runner Premium
252 Channels, HD DVR & 15/1 Broadband | |
|
|
| | | Re: hmmmmm..... That is true also......you pay what $11 a month for 10 channels and out of that 10 only 2 or 3 are worth watching. Half the HD channels are so porr in PQ it's pathetic.
Plus all this advertising for 150 channels reeling customers in...people spending anywhere from $100-300 for equipment that will break every other day. Amazing! | |
|
| | Furthermore.... TWC, CANNOT produce all those channels and give them to their existing customers free of charge by EOY of 2007... It is something that a Monopoly business will do to compete with others... I feel so bad for the folks who have cable. The cable providers thinks that they're doing you a favor by charging high and providing mediocre quality service... | |
|
| | | Re: Furthermore.... Well get ready to see ure bills get a hike due to this. | |
|
| | | | Re: Furthermore.... said by brooklynman4:Well get ready to see ure bills get a hike due to this. They just did. DirecTV had an across the board rate hike, going to far as to completely eliminate many of the existing tiers. Those of us "grandfathered" in are safe for another few months, but the days of Satellite being cheaper are over.
--
AMD X2 4800+ @2700Mhz/ MSI K8N Neo 4 Platinum SLI/ 4x 1024Mb Corsair XMS PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ PNY 7800GTs SLI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| | | PolarBear03The bear formerly known as aaron8301Premium
join:2005-01-03 | Re: Furthermore.... Satellite was never about being cheaper. Heck, I remember back when everyone in my area had 8-foot C-band dishes. Those things cost a fortune. The original point of satellite was to get TV in areas that had no other TV service, not necessarily to be cheaper.
In my town of about 2,000 people, cable TV costs $45/mo and provides about that many channels. I pay $50/mo for DirecTV, and get 180 channels.
--
"I invented it, Bill made it famous." --David Bradley, the inventor of Ctrl+Alt+Del. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Furthermore.... Oh I agree, I've been with DirecTV for 9 years now, and there was only 1 year of that when cable wasn't available to me. I just don't like cable. But if DirecTV continues this trend, I might have to reconsider.
--
AMD X2 4800+ @2700Mhz/ MSI K8N Neo 4 Platinum SLI/ 4x 1024Mb Corsair XMS PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ PNY 7800GTs SLI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| | | | | | try to add up all the HBO, Cinemax, star, and all the pay channels including the exclusive "SETANTA SPORTS" channel and you got a $110 bill... That same one on a Cable would cost you no less than 250... | |
|
| | Sue Sue Sue As has been mentioned before... these companies are just bitchy and annoying now. They all offer JUNK service and then sue each other and throw tantrums. It's just politics anymore. Rather than explain why their own service is good, they just explain why the other one is bad.
Instead of trying to get money by whining about DTV, why doesn't TWC put their money where their mouth is and offer all of the HD content that they claim to support?
I also don't know where this garbage about DTV's HD quality came from. My DTV HD channels look as good as anything i've seen on my friend's cable. You can point out all of the technical imperfections you want, but in real life practice, the end result is just as good. | |
|
|
See 14 replies to this post |
|
| | :'( WAAAAAAHHH!!!! I DON'T LIKE COMPETITION!!! WAHHHHHHHHHH!!!! | |
|
|  Jmartz
join:2000-07-20
Tenafly, NJ | Re: :'( It's never going to happen. There are several Cablevision customers reporting messages such as "Service Not Available" when they tune into a channel that is on Cablevisions switched digital network. So I wish TimeWarner luck. | |
|
|
|  Jwobot
join:2002-08-14
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: Yea! Lets Sue!! That's the Spirit!! That's why I never bought into the HD hype. Limited channels are offered. I see now that the network TV shows are all in HD now, but most of the summer TV shows is on cable TV were the HD channels are not offer on the cable line up. | |
|
Reviews:
·Bright House
| I think.... I think TWC is pissed, and I am sure a few other cable companies are pissed too. Here they are, with less resolution on their HD channels, bragging about something they know can be beat, and at the same time, stating that cable technology is not as good. I know the HD feeds on any Dish provider are not direct from the source. Side by side (and Comcast had a demo lab showing this side by side comparison) the Dish, and we're talking about both providers on the same TV, sucked. There were so many flaws in the picture. I can say that SDV will mark the end of their bragging, and furthermore, I hope TWC wins, because the commercials mis-inform potential customers into a contractual agreement, and they can't just get out of it because "cable has better resolution". As long as the provider gives the service they advertise, which is crappy HD, then they can hold them to the agreement. I hear ex dish customers all the time say they hated the picture on Dish, and hated how bad the HD looked when it rained. Many could still watch the regular SDTV feed, but the HD was so pixelated and choppy, they couldn't watch it. And many also complained about how many shows their DVR's missed because it stormed while they were working, and it was scheduled on an HD channel. Another complaint is the people who were smart enough to record the SDTV feed, only because they knew if something happened, the HD would die, and they hated paying for HD they couldn't record. But whatever, flame away, I just wanted to share a valid concern for all those "I've got DVR for free from dish" geeks. Good for you all, now if you live in Florida, or in the south in general, tell me how well it works in the rain. 
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
|
 joebarnhartPaxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA | It's all irrelevant I can't record any of the content on my MythTv box, so I choose to boycott HD from both DirecTV and cable. I get my HD programming OTA (not HD-lite, either) and time-shift it with my KnoppMyth recorder. Sure, I'd like to see Discovery HD. But since they encrypt it and strangle it with DRM they can keep it.
If HD dies in its crib, DRM will be its killer. | |
|
 PakeIf you can read this.... RUN
join:2001-02-22
Huntersville, NC | This is when.... the telcos need to strike TWC and sue them for their cable internet ads over the claims that their cable does this or that more and better than you can get with DSL.
I wonder if they would drop their lawsuit when faced with a similar one... | |
|
kellenw
join:2003-11-20
Kansas City, MO | The consumer will decide Plain and simple. The customer will choose the best value. The BEST QUALITY isn't paramount to most consumers. They want the best MIX of price and quality. | |
|
 MemphisPCGuySenior Systems EngineerPremium
join:2004-05-09
Memphis, TN
·Comcast
| Im Confused Isnt HDTV mandatory for all providers in 2009? So, while I am willing to pay 8$ a month to Cable to award some of the new HD channels coming into the space (HDNET, INHD), advertising you will have 'more" HDTV channels than your competitor when ALL your channels will be required to be HDTV in 2 years seems odd to me.
--
»www.specmiata.com
»www.roofseek.com | |
|
| kellenw
join:2003-11-20
Kansas City, MO | Re: Im Confused I believe they are only required to be digitally broadcast. I don't think there is a resolution requirement. | |
|
| | bottom line Directv offered these HD cgannels FIRST Notice th word that the CEO of time Warner choose to use
Time Warner: We,Too,Can Offer 100 HDTV Channels
The cable op's chief programming executive says IT WILL have the capacity to match DIRECTV's planned lineup of 100 HD networks by year's end.
By Phillip Swann
and
"I'm 100 percent confident that we WILL have as compelling a HDTV lineup as DIRECTV," Witmer said.
»www.tvpredictions.com/tw030907.htm
--
Don't walk behind me,I may not lead.Don't walk in front of me,I may not follow.
[b]Just walk beside me and be my friend[/b].
| |
|
|
|
·
