Dish VS Direct tv Need Ammo

[Fallguy]

Of cours now that we get Dish, wifes coworkers brother etc are in the mode of you should have got Direct Tv, way better.

I think not, would of had to have 4 receivers instead of 2dual. Their program package with approx 250 channel, locals plus tax runs $78 where dish is approx $65 with tax.

Anything I missed that direct tv members do not understand.

[BattleZone]

For most systems up to 4 TVs, Dish is less expensive, especially if the receivers are plugged into the phone line. For systems beyond 4 TVs, DirecTV will get cheaper as the number of TVs increases.

DirecTV does have a few things that Dish does not. The availability of premium sports packages is a big one. Also, DirecTV DVRs dedicate 2 sat tuners to each TV, whereas most Dish DVR configurations only have 1 sat tuner per TV. Also, each DVR has its own hard drive, so you don't have 2 people/TVs competing for the same limited storage space.

On the other hand, Dish's DVRs can be shared between 2 TVs, and when run in Single Mode, most have PiP and dual live buffers, which some people find important.

In the end, Dish and DirecTV are about 85% identical, but folks have strong opinions about what they want out of the remaining 15%, and one or the other service meets those needs better than the other.

[epokopac]

Of cours now that we get Dish, wifes coworkers brother etc are in the mode of you should have got Direct Tv, way better.

I think not, would of had to have 4 receivers instead of 2dual. Their program package with approx 250 channel, locals plus tax runs $78 where dish is approx $65 with tax.

Anything I missed that direct tv members do not understand.

If you are an NFL and/or NASCAR and/or MLB and/or March Madness junkie then D* (Direct) may be the better choice. Be prepared to pay significant bucks for those packages especially if you want the HD feeds.

The E* (Dish) HD DVRs seem to have a better track record then their D* counterparts based on info in these forums. I would have had SIGNIFICANT up front costs 18 months ago if I went with D*. I had NONE with E*.

If E* gives you want you really want and is less expensive, then just put the "advice" on "ignore". :)

[TBoneit]

For most systems up to 4 TVs, Dish is less expensive, especially if the receivers are plugged into the phone line. For systems beyond 4 TVs, DirecTV will get cheaper as the number of TVs increases.

DirecTV does have a few things that Dish does not. The availability of premium sports packages is a big one. Also, DirecTV DVRs dedicate 2 sat tuners to each TV, whereas most Dish DVR configurations only have 1 sat tuner per TV. Also, each DVR has its own hard drive, so you don't have 2 people/TVs competing for the same limited storage space.

On the other hand, Dish's DVRs can be shared between 2 TVs, and when run in Single Mode, most have PiP and dual live buffers, which some people find important.

In the end, Dish and DirecTV are about 85% identical, but folks have strong opinions about what they want out of the remaining 15%, and one or the other service meets those needs better than the other.

The drawback of one DVR feeding two TVs is also a advantage depending. Two DVRs in dual mode. You could start watching a movie on either DVR. Go to the TV2 locations, example Kitchen or Bedroom and finish watching it from either DVR as long as you have the channels set differently and both DVRs feed them into one cable.

VIP622/VIP722 two Satellite tuners Plus one OTA tuner. Now if they would only come out with a HD model that has a OTA tuner that does both ATSC & QAM like my DVD recorder has.

[BattleZone]

The drawback of one DVR feeding two TVs is also a advantage depending. Two DVRs in dual mode. You could start watching a movie on either DVR. Go to the TV2 locations, example Kitchen or Bedroom and finish watching it from either DVR as long as you have the channels set differently and both DVRs feed them into one cable.

Absolutely right.

In an ideal world, both companies would have DVRs that offered MRV (Multi-Room Viewing) when the DVRs were networked together. TiVo and UlitmateTV had this YEARS ago, though SD only of course.

I know that both providers are talking about a whole-house DVR, presumably with 4+ tuners and a bunch of storage space, and using what are essentially media center extenders at each TV to display the content. The goal is to make this work over coax instead of having to install CAT5/6. The industry still has a ways to go to make that happen, though, and the HD-DVRs already have Ethernet support, and presumably the hardware ability to make MRV happen. It is just the software that needs to be written.

[inkahauts]

Directv's DVR's can feed multiple TV's... But they would all be on the same channel. So if you only watch one of the two or three you hook up at a time, it doesn't matter, but if you need to be able to watch multiple channels on different tv's.. Then Dish is the way to go, i that regard, at this time..

[harsh]

Now if they would only come out with a HD model that has a OTA tuner that does both ATSC & QAM like my DVD recorder has.A satellite receiver that has limited CATV support would have an exceedingly small market indeed. DIRECTV doesn't even see fit to include OTA capability anymore, much less QAM.

I have Comcast with limited basic (because bundling is cheaper than HSI alone) and QAM features would bring me nothing as Comcast doesn't offer me any free QAM programming (not even HD locals).

Being "CATV ready" would get me less than a dozen channels that I couldn't record anyway (something your DVD recorder can do).

[inazsully]

Comparing the HR20 and the 722. On the 722 plus side we have a much bigger hard drive, it fast forwards much faster, it's black, it does not require (at least mine doesn't) a service agreement at $5mo for service calls, it can record on three tuners (one being OTA), it allows for five custom guide settings, it has a very easy to use PIP. On the HR20 plus side we have Directv's more logical channel groupings, easier recording steps, switches back and forth between recorded shows and live TV. That's about all I can come up with after living with the HR20 for two years and the 722 for one week. Both offer certain exclusive HD channels, which sucks. Advantage goes to the 722 hands down, not even close. The first three pluses for the 722 leave the HR20 gasping for air. Oh, I forgot a really big difference. Directv has made the HR20 almost impossible to get anymore. The replacement HR21 does not allow for OTA hook up. You must order and pay for a second separate piece of equipment. Really dumb.

[BNUMM]

Just a small correction. The 722 will require a $5.99 fee for the protection plan after 9 months.

[jclewter79]

Dish network allows for only one coax run to the sat box without any additional cost.

[Jim5506]

Dish network allows for only one coax run to the sat box without any additional cost.

WHAT??

[phrelin]

Dish network allows for only one coax run to the sat box without any additional cost.I'm not sure what you mean. When my 722 was installed, they ran two cables to the box.:confused:

[jclewter79]

I am talking about Dish pro plus technology. One coax with a splitter on the end.

[mishawaka]

For most systems up to 4 TVs, Dish is less expensive, especially if the receivers are plugged into the phone line. For systems beyond 4 TVs, DirecTV will get cheaper as the number of TVs increases.

DirecTV does have a few things that Dish does not. The availability of premium sports packages is a big one. Also, DirecTV DVRs dedicate 2 sat tuners to each TV, whereas most Dish DVR configurations only have 1 sat tuner per TV. Also, each DVR has its own hard drive, so you don't have 2 people/TVs competing for the same limited storage space.

On the other hand, Dish's DVRs can be shared between 2 TVs, and when run in Single Mode, most have PiP and dual live buffers, which some people find important.

In the end, Dish and DirecTV are about 85% identical, but folks have strong opinions about what they want out of the remaining 15%, and one or the other service meets those needs better than the other.

wow, one of the most informative, and least homer-ish posts i've read on here. :righton:

[harsh]

One coax with a splitter on the end.SEPARATOR.

Yes, it does matter.

[harsh]

I'm not sure what you mean. When my 722 was installed, they ran two cables to the box.:confused:Because you have more than two receivers, they used a DP34 switch which is not DPP capable.

[jclewter79]

SEPARATOR.

Yes, it does matter.

Yes, it does sorry harsh, I would not want to confuse anybody.

[RichardMcCarty]

For most systems up to 4 TVs, Dish is less expensive, especially if the receivers are plugged into the phone line. ..

Well, I didn't find that to be the case at all. My "everything" Dish costs were 25% more than my "everything" DirecTV costs.

The loss of MLB last year and Voom this year were the last straw. I cancelled all Dish programming except for WPIX. Gotta see those Sunday Mets games.

[TBoneit]

A satellite receiver that has limited CATV support would have an exceedingly small market indeed. DIRECTV doesn't even see fit to include OTA capability anymore, much less QAM.

I have Comcast with limited basic (because bundling is cheaper than HSI alone) and QAM features would bring me nothing as Comcast doesn't offer me any free QAM programming (not even HD locals).

Being "CATV ready" would get me less than a dozen channels that I couldn't record anyway (something your DVD recorder can do).

Well I have Basic Cable too, along with High Speed Internet. Currently from the basic cable Via the QAM capable tuner in my HDTV and a DVD recorder I can tune the HD locals and Subchannels on both.

The DVD recorder does tune the HD locals however.... My only reason for wanting the 622 to tune QAM is then I could record them as HD adding all the locals + subchannels not just the ones Dish carries. Rather than as 16:9 SD on the DVD recorder.

BTW on another forum I keep hearing that the cable company is supposed to provide the HD locals in the clear.
Oh well.

Cheers

[harsh]

My only reason for wanting the 622 to tune QAM is then I could record them as HD adding all the locals + subchannels not just the ones Dish carries. Rather than as 16:9 SD on the DVD recorder.Understanding that your situation is rather unique, you should consider a CATV DVR.BTW on another forum I keep hearing that the cable company is supposed to provide the HD locals in the clear.I've heard that too, but it doesn't happen with my local Comcast and limited basic service.

[TBoneit]

I suspect that if I went for the HD DVR from the cable company they'd want a rental fee on it, & a rental fee on the remote. It isn't worth it. I know I'm probably unique in some ways. But there must be others that have cable and would like to get locals off of it. I'd go antenna if I weren't afraid of heights. A indoor antenna doesn't work as well as it used to ever since they put some kind of foil coated foam underneath when they sided the house. I suspect that the foil blocks the tv signal. BTW I tried their SD box and it was terrible.

I just dropped from the AEP with locals and all HD packages to the top 250 with locals and the HD packages to save money. My next phone calls like that will be to the phone company to drop services I don't use. I expect to end up with basic phone and Caller ID only. I got rid of long distance years ago.

When I say save money it was that it isn't worth the difference between the AEP and the top 250 for the one or sometimes two movies watched from the 4 movie networks per week. This year I've paid off two debts and now I have to look at what credit card to concentrate on next.

[bradneal]

wifes coworkers brother etc are in the mode of you should have got Direct Tv, way better.

To me, that's kinda like saying that Ford is better than Chevy, but not backing up the statement with any facts. In my opinion, it boils down to a matter of preference.

[jerrylove56]

Anything I missed that direct tv members do not understand.[/QUOTE]

Points for New Satellite Consumers.

1. Yes cable is cheaper, particularly when bundled with other services.
2. Dish Networks satellite equipment is stellar when compared to Direct's.

However:

1. Cable lacks the programming available to either Satellite provider.
2. Dish Network's equipment is great but their customer service and programming falls way short of Direct TV's.

Dish continues to operate like a mom and pop setup. They refuse to go after high end sports programming and this will doom them. :D

I installed Dish - July 1, 08 and disconnected Aug. 5, 08 - One of the worst experiences in my life. (Had VIP722 and 622 units)

I had Direct previously and resigned with them. (Have HR22 and SD unit)

[inazsully]

Anything I missed that direct tv members do not understand.

Points for New Satellite Consumers.

1. Yes cable is cheaper, particularly when bundled with other services.
2. Dish Networks satellite equipment is stellar when compared to Direct's.

However:

1. Cable lacks the programming available to either Satellite provider.
2. Dish Network's equipment is great but their customer service and programming falls way short of Direct TV's.

Dish continues to operate like a mom and pop setup. They refuse to go after high end sports programming and this will doom them. :D

I installed Dish - July 1, 08 and disconnected Aug. 5, 08 - One of the worst experiences in my life. (Had VIP722 and 622 units)

I had Direct previously and resigned with them. (Have HR22 and SD unit)[/QUOTE]




I don't see how anybody's customer service can be worse than Directv's. I've been with them for over 12 years and I'd rather have a root canal then spend the day trying to have a logical conversation with a Directv rep.
The HR22 requires a second piece of equipment at your expense for OTA
The 722 has a 50hr HD hard drive. Much larger than the HR20, not sure about the HR22.
The 722 has three recordable tuners compared to Directv's two tuners.
Directv offers, for $25, a lighted remote. Very smart on their part.
The 722 fast forwards much faster then Directv.
The 722 (maybe all of Dish's receivers) reboot much faster than Directv's receivers.

Did I mention that Directv requires a second piece of equipment to install an OTA line? The HR20 did not require this but the new HR21 and HR22 do require this added expense to the customer. Bad move that cancels out the plus for 0fferong a lighted remote (which they do not advertise).

[Curtis0620]

HR20 has a 50HR Recording capacity; HR22 is 100HR.

[inkahauts]

I am talking about Dish pro plus technology. One coax with a splitter on the end.

Directv now has SWM technology... runs over exsisting cable lines, splitters and all..

[BattleZone]

Did I mention that Directv requires a second piece of equipment to install an OTA line? The HR20 did not require this but the new HR21 and HR22 do require this added expense to the customer. Bad move that cancels out the plus for 0fferong a lighted remote (which they do not advertise).

Most customers don't want and don't care about OTA. Most want their locals via the dish, and DirecTV carries most SD and a large and growing number of HD DMAs.

Granted, those relative few who DO care about OTA are quite vocal about it, and I fully understand why, but understand that OTA is a tiny percentage these days, and will continue to shrink as both companies expand the number of DMAs they provide HD locals to via the dish.

DirecTV made a very logical business decision to remove the OTA functionality, and it virtually coincided with lowering the up-front lease fee $100. Sure, you have to pay $60 if you want OTA anyway, to get the OTA tuner, but that's still $40 less than before, and for most people (who don't need or care about OTA), they pay $100 less. Not a bad deal all the way around.

In my area, in 11 months working for DishNetwork, doing 20-30 jobs per day, we have connected exactly FOUR receivers to (existing) OTA antennas. Yes, that may be lower because we have HD locals here, compared to DMAs that don't, but I'd be very, very surprised if even 5% of all Dish receivers that have ATSC OTA tuners are connected to an antenna. DirecTV's survey found that it was about 3% of their installed base.

[BNUMM]

Dish now has a receiver without an OTA tuner. It is the 722K.

[jclewter79]

Directv now has SWM technology... runs over exsisting cable lines, splitters and all..

That is true but it is not fully released nationwide with no additional cost yet.

[jclewter79]

Dish now has a receiver without an OTA tuner. It is the 722K.

I knew that the OTA was consider optional, but when was this released? I am sure glad that I got one with the OTA tuner.

[smackman]

If Dish Network offered my local market in HD I could care less about OTA.
IF DIRECTV carried my locals(SD or HD) I would leave Dish and try Directv because I am pissed at CSR with Dish.
I live in the 71241 area code and Directv does not even offer SD locals

[BNUMM]

I knew that the OTA was consider optional, but when was this released? I am sure glad that I got one with the OTA tuner.
I don't know if it has been released yet. I just heard about it the other day and a retailer confirmed it today.

[RAD]

That is true but it is not fully released nationwide with no additional cost yet.
The SWM LNB is now national and if you're a new install with between 5 and 8 tuners you get it as part of the normal install. The external SWM8 is still only for MDU installs but you can purchase one, the lowest price I've seen is $140.

[jclewter79]

The SWM LNB is now national and if you're a new install with between 5 and 8 tuners you get it as part of the normal install. The external SWM8 is still only for MDU installs but you can purchase one, the lowest price I've seen is $140.

You have to have 5 or more tuners to get one line running to your dvr?

[RAD]

You have to have 5 or more tuners to get one line running to your dvr?
That's the current rules that D* uses to determine if a new install gets the SWM LNB, which allows for one wire installs, or if you get legacy LNB/switch which requires two lines.

And it's between 5 and 8, if you need more then 8 tuners then you also don't get the SWM LNB since it maxes out at 8 tuners. For that if you need SWM you'd have to get two SWM8's on your own.

[jclewter79]

That's the current rules that D* uses to determine if a new install gets the SWM LNB, which allows for one wire installs, or if you get legacy LNB/switch which requires two lines.

And it's between 5 and 8, if you need more then 8 tuners then you also don't get the SWM LNB since it maxes out at 8 tuners. For that if you need SWM you'd have to get two SWM8's on your own.

That is good to know.

[harsh]

Dish now has a receiver without an OTA tuner. It is the 722K.The 722K isn't due for another year yet.

[dbrakob]

Of cours now that we get Dish, wifes coworkers brother etc are in the mode of you should have got Direct Tv, way better.

I think not, would of had to have 4 receivers instead of 2dual. Their program package with approx 250 channel, locals plus tax runs $78 where dish is approx $65 with tax.

Anything I missed that direct tv members do not understand.

Who cares what they think. If you did your research and think you made the right decision tell them to mind their own business.

[inazsully]

Most customers don't want and don't care about OTA. Most want their locals via the dish, and DirecTV carries most SD and a large and growing number of HD DMAs.

Granted, those relative few who DO care about OTA are quite vocal about it, and I fully understand why, but understand that OTA is a tiny percentage these days, and will continue to shrink as both companies expand the number of DMAs they provide HD locals to via the dish.

DirecTV made a very logical business decision to remove the OTA functionality, and it virtually coincided with lowering the up-front lease fee $100. Sure, you have to pay $60 if you want OTA anyway, to get the OTA tuner, but that's still $40 less than before, and for most people (who don't need or care about OTA), they pay $100 less. Not a bad deal all the way around.

In my area, in 11 months working for DishNetwork, doing 20-30 jobs per day, we have connected exactly FOUR receivers to (existing) OTA antennas. Yes, that may be lower because we have HD locals here, compared to DMAs that don't, but I'd be very, very surprised if even 5% of all Dish receivers that have ATSC OTA tuners are connected to an antenna. DirecTV's survey found that it was about 3% of their installed base.

Wow, most customers. That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know where you get your data but in Phoenix almost all customers can get locals OTA, via rabbit ears in most cases. The 722 (not sure about the 612 but I think it has this capability also) actually allows recording with a third tuner via OTA. That is a huge huge advantage over Directv. OTA in Phoenix includes CWHD which features "Smallville" and "Supernatural", four PBS channels, two of which are in HD, and several other local channels. As far as I know neither Dish nor Directv offer local PBS channels. Granted many customers are probably unaware that they can get their locals OTA but I'm pretty sure that if they knew OTA locals were available they would want them. Why would anybody not want something for free that they could use. Lots of great HD nature shows, concerts, and cooking shows on PBS.

[phrelin]

Wow, most customers. That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know where you get your data but in Phoenix almost all customers can get locals OTA, via rabbit ears in most cases. The 722 (not sure about the 612 but I think it has this capability also) actually allows recording with a third tuner via OTA. That is a huge huge advantage over Directv. OTA in Phoenix includes CWHD which features "Smallville" and "Supernatural", four PBS channels, two of which are in HD, and several other local channels. As far as I know neither Dish nor Directv offer local PBS channels. Granted many customers are probably unaware that they can get their locals OTA but I'm pretty sure that if they knew OTA locals were available they would want them. Why would anybody not want something for free that they could use. Lots of great HD nature shows, concerts, and cooking shows on PBS.http://www.msgweb.nl/images/emoticons/Green/item3692.gifI must admit I am green with envy. But I still like living in the backwoods.

[purtman]

Wow, most customers. That's a pretty bold statement. I don't know where you get your data but in Phoenix almost all customers can get locals OTA, via rabbit ears in most cases. The 722 (not sure about the 612 but I think it has this capability also) actually allows recording with a third tuner via OTA. That is a huge huge advantage over Directv. OTA in Phoenix includes CWHD which features "Smallville" and "Supernatural", four PBS channels, two of which are in HD, and several other local channels. As far as I know neither Dish nor Directv offer local PBS channels. Granted many customers are probably unaware that they can get their locals OTA but I'm pretty sure that if they knew OTA locals were available they would want them. Why would anybody not want something for free that they could use. Lots of great HD nature shows, concerts, and cooking shows on PBS.

You can record with DirecTV with OTA. I do it all the time. If I'm reading your post incorrectly, I apologize. However, we don't have the local PBS in HD via DirecTV, just SD. As far as your comments about the great shows on PBS, I couldn't agree more. I love the streaming channels. We actually have five here, one of them being the national feed that the locals do not touch. Thank God. The locals showed the first eight parts of nine-part series on building a kitchen from New Yankee Workshop. The weekend of the ninth show, they decided that they wanted to reward their viewers by showing their most popular shows and try to raise funds. I don't know how many times they showed "50 years of the Osmonds", but I think that's punishment, not reward. You think they could have shown a 30-minute show that was the last part of the series.

[Cap'n Preshoot]

Lack of ATSC OTA support in Direct's new HD receivers & DVR was one of the chief reasons (among several others) which helped us make the original decision to switch to DISH. However, after 9 months as an actual Dish customer (to the tune of $124.00 a month), the only thing keeping me is the 9 months remaining in my contract term. As much as I loathe Cable, at the present time it appears to be the lesser of the available evils.

I will say that DISH has clearer/sharper HD Locals in this market than Direct and I really like the VIP-722 DVR - it's inarguably the jewel in the Dish Network crown. However, we're very tired of all the rain fade with the weak signals coming from the 129 bird and the 7~10 minutes it takes for the DISH receivers (VIP-722 and 222) to recover from rain fade. That's unacceptable! Our old D* HD receivers (Hughes Platinum E86) would snap back in immediately, literally within seconds of signal reacquisition and the guide data would stay in memory instead of having to be re-downloaded every time as it does with Dish.

Considering all the pluses and minuses after having tried both DISH and DirecTV, the scales seem to balance pretty equally. Both systems have their warts and both have their attributes. Personally I've grown sufficiently weary of both and will be looking for greener pastures come next June.

When you live near the Texas Gulf Coast, as we do, having access to OTA signals because your satellite system is wiped out from rain fade while a hurricane is out there swirling around somewhere seems like an important thing to have. Granted the TVs have built-in ATSC tuners, but that means having to switch inputs and usually not have any guide info.

[jclewter79]

Lack of ATSC OTA support in Direct's new HD receivers & DVR was one of the chief reasons (among several others) which helped us make the original decision to switch to DISH. However, after 9 months as an actual Dish customer (to the tune of $124.00 a month), the only thing keeping me is the 9 months remaining in my contract term. As much as I loathe Cable, at the present time it appears to be the lesser of the available evils.

I will say that DISH has clearer/sharper HD Locals in this market than Direct and I really like the VIP-722 DVR - it's inarguably the jewel in the Dish Network crown. However, we're very tired of all the rain fade with the weak signals coming from the 129 bird and the 7~10 minutes it takes for the DISH receivers (VIP-722 and 222) to recover from rain fade. That's unacceptable! Our old D* HD receivers (Hughes Platinum E86) would snap back in immediately, literally within seconds of signal reacquisition and the guide data would stay in memory instead of having to be re-downloaded every time as it does with Dish.

Considering all the pluses and minuses after having tried both DISH and DirecTV, the scales seem to balance pretty equally. Both systems have their warts and both have their attributes. Personally I've grown sufficiently weary of both and will be looking for greener pastures come next June.

When you live near the Texas Gulf Coast, as we do, having access to OTA signals because your satellite system is wiped out from rain fade while a hurricane is out there swirling around somewhere seems like an important thing to have. Granted the TVs have built-in ATSC tuners, but that means having to switch inputs and usually not have any guide info.


You know that 129 bird is a weak one but, I have not had a huge amount of rain fade out of it. I do bet that on the coast it is worse. The good newsis the replacement bird launches early next year so by june maybe your problems are solved.

[dld542004]

Of cours now that we get Dish, wifes coworkers brother etc are in the mode of you should have got Direct Tv, way better.

I think not, would of had to have 4 receivers instead of 2dual. Their program package with approx 250 channel, locals plus tax runs $78 where dish is approx $65 with tax.

Anything I missed that direct tv members do not understand.

Dish has better equipment

[ivtech]

Lack of ATSC OTA support in Direct's new HD receivers & DVR was one of the chief reasons (among several others) which helped us make the original decision to switch to DISH. However, after 9 months as an actual Dish customer (to the tune of $124.00 a month), the only thing keeping me is the 9 months remaining in my contract term. As much as I loathe Cable, at the present time it appears to be the lesser of the available evils.

I will say that DISH has clearer/sharper HD Locals in this market than Direct and I really like the VIP-722 DVR - it's inarguably the jewel in the Dish Network crown. However, we're very tired of all the rain fade with the weak signals coming from the 129 bird and the 7~10 minutes it takes for the DISH receivers (VIP-722 and 222) to recover from rain fade. That's unacceptable! Our old D* HD receivers (Hughes Platinum E86) would snap back in immediately, literally within seconds of signal reacquisition and the guide data would stay in memory instead of having to be re-downloaded every time as it does with Dish.

Considering all the pluses and minuses after having tried both DISH and DirecTV, the scales seem to balance pretty equally. Both systems have their warts and both have their attributes. Personally I've grown sufficiently weary of both and will be looking for greener pastures come next June.

When you live near the Texas Gulf Coast, as we do, having access to OTA signals because your satellite system is wiped out from rain fade while a hurricane is out there swirling around somewhere seems like an important thing to have. Granted the TVs have built-in ATSC tuners, but that means having to switch inputs and usually not have any guide info.


But isn't true that when the dish fades out it takes out the locals unless you are waching the locals at the time of the lost signal,in my old 311 receiver when i lost the signal then i wanted to change to the locals but i couldn't because the system was out, with my new 211 i have not experenced it yet.