Which is better? Cable or DBS?

I know this might be an easy question for most but I have some observations.

Cable in my town (Time Warner) isn't all that bad. Kind of expensive but the quality is fair (not great). I have a broadband connection so I am required to subsribe to the "lifeline" package. While watching cable, the picture may have more noise but the resolution is much sharper and clearer than DBS. I find it much more pleasing to watch cable.

Don't get me wrong. I like DBS but it's too bad they have taken the quantity over quality road.

The cable in my area has too few channels, costs tooo much, and those channels are usually poor picture quality (color's off, static, etc). But when the cable has a good PQ channel (rare indeed) it is usually outstanding and DBS can't meet the PQ. But on an overall satisfaction, I see more and more DBS dishes going.

The cable company used to be Time-Warner, then Became Media One, then became AT&T. I still think that the hardware is old Time-Warner, so if they did upgrade the hardware in the ground it might change (doubt it)

Just for those who have not been keeping track, I had a Primestar system installed almost seven years ago. It was either a DBS system or OTA. We moved to a house sitting in the middle of 18 acres, and the cable co. wasn't beating down my door to string up cable. Primestar had a great picture. Equipment/guide wasn't anything to brag about, but I had the same boxes for about five years with never a problem. After about five years I was converted to DirecTV. I got two RCA 420 boxes. Still a good picture. I liked the boxes and guides, although I had to have one replaced after just a few months after it gave a big pop and sizzle one night and went dead. Five months ago we moved. I have no idea, except for what I read in the forums what PQ has been like over the past five months. In moving to Omaha several things influenced my decision to try cable again. First, my wife asked if when we moved we could get a cable modem for a faster connection. I gave in to her request. :D I read a report that gave the cable service in Omaha one of the nation's highest rankings. The cable internet connection was less expensive by also subscribing to digital cable. It was also less expensive to include phone service. And long distance. Right now, except for my cell phones all our communications is done over Cox cable. I have two digital boxes, with pretty much all the bells and whistles of a DBS box (S-video, component jacks, Dolby, video-blaster, interactive guide, etc. This is not anybodies leftover hardware from a decade ago). The picture is just as good as what I had with DBS, both in the analog and digital. No pixilation, no rain fade, no "aquiring information" message when I look ahead on the guide. The only time we have had any interruption of service was when we lost the internet connection for about an hour when they did an upgrade to the system. Channel line up is pretty much comparable to DBS, and so is cost, although since I am a "Total Home" subscriber I may actually be getting a better deal than some DBS subs. It is hard to tell, I keep changing stuff around, for three of the five months we were paying off the modem, etc., so its a little hard to pin down exactly what our monthly charge is. But I am very happy. If I felt I was being screwed I would not hesitate to go back to DBS, but from what I hear 0n the forums, I am better off where I am at. I am not trying to say every cable company is as good as what I am experiencing, in fact from what I hear, not every Cox system is as good as what I am experiencing, but what I have here shows cable can do a very good job. Those of you who are convinced DBS is the only way to receive a good signal had better hope every cable system doesn't become as good as Cox Omaha, or your system won't be there anymore.
As far as which is "better." Hard to say. When it was either OTA or DBS, DBS was better. Right now, in my situation, I would say they are equal. And from what I hear, right now my signal might be better than many DBS subs are receiving. I think they both can be very good. If the people running the companies care to it that way.

1.PQ was better with Dish Network than cable.
2.Pricing is very close, although I get a few more stations with Dish Network.
3.My cable company still doesn't offer Digital service or Broadband.
4.Music channels are nice with DBS.
5.I Love my PVR receiver.

For me its a NO BRAINER.....I LIKE DBS better.

There is one thing I miss, my cable modem, that I used to have.I just recently moved, I lived in an area surrounded by Time Warner and I moved to the one little area that is provided by Cable One.......and they offer nothing right now,no digital........nothing!!!

I used to love to play Quake 1,2,3 and Unreal Tournament online......but these days with a 56k connect its almost impossible.....its frustrating for me. I miss playing with all my gamming buddies.

You just had to ask Bogy....Im done whinning now. :)

John C

Chris, as you'll recall, I used to disagree strongly with you about cable being a better picture than Dish. Of course that was on a 27" tv. Now that I have the 51" widescreen, at the moment, I'd have to agree that my cable picture is "better". It has more noise, but is also much sharper than anything I get from Dish. I'm hoping that when the spot birds go up that the Dish PQ will improve. It has gotton better in the last couple of weeks, but needs to be crisper, IMO...

Better hope that the PQ doesnt get any crispier (or extra crispy). You may end up getting Jason Alexander as Dish's new spokesperson. :D (and that's not a good thing!)

I am wrong about Jason. I did hear that "Hip Hop" Mariah is in need of a job soon. I dont think Charlie is quite ready for a Britany (No..not Britany Spears!! The female brat Britany) and Mariah duet with Snoop Doggy Dogg anytime soon. :)

For me it is an no-brainer. I would have to PAY the cable compnay to run a line to my rural property and I still wouldn't get channels like RAI, Superstations, and Nets from other time zones. And I am one of the few left who still love my Dishplayer and the cable company has no good alternative for a PVR (unless I want to buy a SA Tivo)

I think that Mariah can take a little time off from working with the $28 Million escape clause. :D

I prefer DBS to our local cable (AT&T analog) for the following reasons:

1. HORRIBLE SERVICE from AT&T
2. Horrible picture and channel selection on cable
3. No digital service (even though I am in a city of over 100,000)
4. They tore up my back yard and sprinkler system to install my neighbor's cable!

Reason #4 was the primary reason for leaving AT&T for DirecTV. I now have three receivers, one of them being an UltimateTV receiver. I'd never go back.

I'm from Europe and sort of used to for having a dish. I feel that DBS is more flexible and for the money ofers more chanels. Sat radio is a nice feature. PVR works better with DBS if you get receiver combo, because it stores on hard drive in digital. As far as digital cable goes, it is probably the same quality as DBS, but pricing is higher I think.

On other hand with DBS it's more complicated and cost extra money to get the chanels on more than one TV. If you have only one TV or max. two, I would go with the DBS for sure.

Malfunctioning equipment, missed service calls, poor reception on certain channels, interminable waits for a CSR,frequent outages (and yes they had a special number to call but it was always busy)and high rates.

DBS is not perfect but I saved $ added channels and gained a significantly better picture.

My local cable comapny has since been acquired by Cox and I do hear things have improved somewhat but I am not interested in going back.

And yes I lost my locals (and only locals) in a recent snowstorm for about 3 hours. That was my first significant outage in 2 1/2 years. With cable it was a regualar occurence.

I've always beleived you cant make a blanket statement when comparing "The which is better" scenario. It really depends where you live and who your provider is.
Where I live, my Cable operator provides excellent picture quality with all the options that most cable operators dont provide. When I compare Expressvu with Rogers Cable I actually get a better channel selection with Cable. Rogers offers more Specialty channels, More PPV channels, NFL Ticket and Centre Ice, More Ethnic Services, and Timeshifting channels from different regions and a West Coast Feed of U.S. Networks, as well as the best HDTV lineup. Few cable companies are going that extra mile. If you live in rural areas, I would say go with Satellite. I actually have both services and both have been very reliable. Excluding the rental cost of the Digital Box, the Programming costs are identical with both Services except cable gives you more channels. Cable also has a big bandwidth advantage and the ability to offer 2-way services. Rogers is also rolling out Video-on-Demand which is something that satellite cant offer. As much as some of you may hate cable, I know they have some big long term advantages and I'm sticking with them.

Its been reported that she is close to signing a contract with Def Jam soon. The bad part is that she is just gonna do urban music CDs for now on. IMHO, she was better off when she did Adult Contemp music. Her music sales have fallen sharply since she started doing urban music back in 1995.

Yes, I have to agree. If all cable systems were like the newly built parts of Rogers system in Toronto - well, pizza dishes would be strictly a rural site.

Cable has won the battle guys when you see what Rogers has done - add unlimited HiSpeed internet at $25/month US - no contest

OK, IMO

Comcast wins in these categories
1) Better Overall PQ.
2) Comcast SportsNet
3) All Local Channels
4) No Dish Involved, Easier Setup
5) No worrying about buying equipment, IRD or switches..

DirecTV wins in these categories
1) Better monthly pricing (way better)
2) More National Channels (Hallmark fulltime, MuchMusic, Trio, National Geographic Channel, IFC, WE, etc.) Comcast has HBO Comedy, Starz! Cinema, VH1 Soul though...
3) DirecTiVo

DirecTiVo really keeps me with DirecTV. I have Comcast also, but if Comcast had a ComcastTiVo (Dual Tuner), I'd consider dropping DirecTV. I have tried standalone PVRs, they just dont match DirecTiVo. Showstopper Panasonic unit is good, no monthly fee, no Dish commitments.

I prefer DirecTV over Dish Network. I used to be with Dish Network. But they didnt have the PVR DirecTiVo, and I didnt like using a standalone PVR with Dish anymore. Also lack of new channels, the $5 fees ($5 Access Fee, $5 for just UPN/WB, $5 downgrade fee, $5 sidegrade fee...got sick of em) Their rates arent lower anymore to DirecTV. They are still lower than Comcast, but I dont feel the elimininating of DBS providers will keep Dish/DirecTV as competitive with local Comcast. I am not too thrilled with Philly locals on 129w Telstar, either.

All I know is that Time Warner wanted $83 a month for digital cable and the Starz Super Pak. I pay $54 on Directv. The only extra is that Time Warner has Starz family and cinema.