View Full Version : DIRECTV to Carry 11 HBO/Cinemax Channels In HD
Earl Bonovich
06-12-07, 02:18 PM
DIRECTV to Carry 11 HBO/Cinemax Channels In HD
The new channels will be added in September.
By Phillip Swann
Washington, D.C. (June 12, 2007) -- DIRECTV plans to carry 11 HBO/Cinemax channels in High-Definition this September, TVPredictions.com has learned.
...
See the rest of the article at TVPredictions (http://www.tvpredictions.com/directvhbo061207.htm)
Other articles there discuss that HBO will have all 26 of their networks in HD... just not confirmed for DirecTV.
RobertE
06-12-07, 02:26 PM
WooHoo....Bring'em on. :dance01: :icon_bb: :jump3: :joy: :dance:
Could you please add these channels to the Predicted sticky?
compnurd
06-12-07, 02:26 PM
Yeh no need
bonscott87
06-12-07, 02:28 PM
Not *that's* what I'm talking about. Between those and 5 Starz channels in HD I'm all set.
And Kudo's to Swanni for actually getting a scoop vs. just copying from the forums. I haven't seen this anywhere else today.
say-what
06-12-07, 02:28 PM
Good, more HD content!
Earl Bonovich
06-12-07, 02:30 PM
In related news:
Here is the discussion thread about the other 15 NOT announced for DirecTV.
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=89726
You think that somewhere in there that they would at lease be able to squeeze in HBO Comedy (SD or HD) somwhere.
DIRECTV to Carry 11 HBO/Cinemax Channels In HD
Of course I just cancelled HBO post-Sopranos, after 20-something years as a subscriber. May have to reinstate it now! :)
Interesting timing by HBO. Probably important for them to get some good news for subscribers out there. Many either cancelled or are prepared to cancel at the end of the month, in protest over the Soprano's ending. /s
Earl Bonovich
06-12-07, 02:36 PM
And Kudo's to Swanni for actually getting a scoop vs. just copying from the forums. I haven't seen this anywhere else today.
I clipped it by just happening to be there when it posted.
The 26 channel article was there, and when I refereshed... then there was the DirecTV one.
Tom Robertson
06-12-07, 02:40 PM
Not *that's* what I'm talking about. Between those and 5 Starz channels in HD I'm all set.
And Kudo's to Swanni for actually getting a scoop vs. just copying from the forums. I haven't seen this anywhere else today.
Did you copy a PM I sent to Earl? Your first paragraph was almost verbatim! :D
Woohoo, I'm ready.
Cheers,
Tom
say-what
06-12-07, 02:40 PM
You think that somewhere in there that they would at lease be able to squeeze in HBO Comedy (SD or HD) somwhere.They're probably saving that spot for QVCHD :lol:
DCSholtis
06-12-07, 02:40 PM
Good start. Hopefully D* will pick up the rest but if not. I'll be happy.
Good start. Hopefully D* will pick up the rest but if not. I'll be happy.
Interesting thought, "the rest". While D* is the leaders in a lot of areas they sure are falling behind in the amount of Premium movie channels. Here is the current amounts by provider.
I am including this areas local cable, and I know the numbers may vary from cable company to cable company, BHN.
Just wondering why we get fewer than the other services.
Be nice to have more, to choose from, but I am really looking forward to all the new ones in HD this fall.
oldschoolecw
06-12-07, 04:45 PM
I was thinking well what about all the other HBO channels as well and I must say I am very disappointed about not seeing other HBO channels added to list.
morgantown
06-12-07, 05:52 PM
Great step in the right direction. Personally I'd much rather get what we already have in SD in HD before worrying about "new" premiums, so this is good news.
After that, expansion is great too... :)
I was thinking well what about all the other HBO channels as well and I must say I am very disappointed about not seeing other HBO channels added to list.
Read Page 2.:rolleyes:
morgantown
06-12-07, 06:16 PM
Read Page 2.:rolleyes:
Page two was about HBO's announcement...not DTV's. No announcement for carriage w/DTV other than those listed on page one.
bonscott87
06-12-07, 06:29 PM
Once D11 makes it up safely then they would have the bandwidth to add the rest if they so choose.
All the announcements are starting to push the limits of what they can put on just D10. I honestly didn't think they'd get close to 150 that both sats will provide but holy cow they may get close within a couple years easy. They may just need to get that ground spare, D12, up and running and in the sky to provide more bandwidth, assuming they have the in orbit capacity to do so.
Once D11 makes it up safely then they would have the bandwidth to add the rest if they so choose.In addition, if D* replaces the first generation Tandberg MPEG-4 encoders they bought in 2005 with the new, second generation EN8090, they may be able to deliver 3 channels in the same bandwidth that 2 take today. Here's a quote from the brochure (http://www.tandbergtv.com/uploads/documents/Tandberg1313Pages1.pdf):
"The EN8090 Encoder excels in encoding performance. Supporting a range of horizontal resolutions at 1080i and 720p, extraordinary picture quality is supported at under 6 Mbps with improved visible artifact removal. This new level of performance represents up to a 50% improvement over currently deployed MPEG-4 AVC HD encoders, enabling operators to pack more services into the available bandwidth without sacrificing video quality."
/s
guess i need to start diggin' around in the garage for those BBC's
Good news, glad to hear that new HD stations are coming online.
Once D11 makes it up safely then they would have the bandwidth to add the rest if they so choose.
All the announcements are starting to push the limits of what they can put on just D10. I honestly didn't think they'd get close to 150 that both sats will provide but holy cow they may get close within a couple years easy. They may just need to get that ground spare, D12, up and running and in the sky to provide more bandwidth, assuming they have the in orbit capacity to do so.
My thoughts exactly!.:rolleyes:
jeff125va
06-13-07, 09:19 AM
Has there been any word on whether HBO "1" will continue to be in mpeg-2? I.e., will it still come in on the HR-10's? Have they made any blanket statement on the format for the other existing channels?
Michael D'Angelo
06-13-07, 09:27 AM
Has there been any word on whether HBO "1" will continue to be in mpeg-2? I.e., will it still come in on the HR-10's? Have they made any blanket statement on the format for the other existing channels?
Once the new channels are launch all the MPEG2 HD channels will still be there but don't know how long. At some point they will be moved over to MPEG4.
Earl Bonovich
06-13-07, 09:32 AM
About a year ago... when they first announced the transition to MPEG-4... they stated that all existing MPEG-2 HD will be converted to MPEG-4...
But no time table was given.
Earl Bonovich
06-13-07, 10:10 AM
Now it is no longer a "rumor":
Official press release from DirecTV:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1015081&highlight=
ScoBuck
06-13-07, 11:01 AM
Now it is no longer a "rumor":
Official press release from DirecTV:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1015081&highlight=
DirecTV has put out press releases in the past 4 weeks that announce 26 new HD channels launching in September - and I would bet that this is only the beginning of a steady stream of similar announcements. This in addition to the assorted other networks and channels they have already announced.
I think the 100 number is starting to look better and better.
SDizzle
06-13-07, 04:25 PM
Interesting thought, "the rest". While D* is the leaders in a lot of areas they sure are falling behind in the amount of Premium movie channels. Here is the current amounts by provider.
I am including this areas local cable, and I know the numbers may vary from cable company to cable company, BHN.
Just wondering why we get fewer than the other services.
Be nice to have more, to choose from, but I am really looking forward to all the new ones in HD this fall.
WOW! What a big gap that is! I never looked into this. But, the 54 for cable has to be in certain markets, when I had Crapcast in sac, I don't remember that many, even in the digital tier. But, the E* number is available everywhere, and that number is quite a difference from D*.
WOW! What a big gap that is! I never looked into this. But, the 54 for cable has to be in certain markets, when I had Crapcast in sac, I don't remember that many, even in the digital tier. But, the E* number is available everywhere, and that number is quite a difference from D*.
That it is D* has less and D* is cheaper.:rolleyes:
That it is D* has less and D* is cheaper.:rolleyes:
Don't think so:
DirecTV has 31 Premium Channels at an add on cost of $46.00 a month.
DISH has 42 Premium Channels at an add on cost of $40.00 a month
BHN Cable has 54 Premium Channels at an add on cost of $26.95 a month
So DirecTV is the highest cost per channel for premiums.
DIRECTV to Carry 11 HBO/Cinemax Channels In HD
See the rest of the article at TVPredictions (http://www.tvpredictions.com/directvhbo061207.htm)
Other articles there discuss that HBO will have all 26 of their networks in HD... just not confirmed for DirecTV.
this is the article from Variety:
In his first public act as HBO's permanent CEO, Bill Nelson announced that the company would be upgrading all of its nets to high-def by the middle of 2008.
Initiative, which is expected to cost in the tens of millions of dollars, will see the net offer HD programming on all 26 of its so-called multiplexes; those nets include HBO channels such as HBO Comedy and HBO Family and Cinemax nets such as ActionMAX and ThrillerMAX.
Only HBO and Cinemax offer hi-def feeds.
Many of the multiplex nets are driven by theatrical movies, a format that particularly lends itself to hi-def.
DirecTV is expected to announce today that it will be the first operator to carry the HBO nets in HD. HBO is in negotiations with other cable and satellite operators for similar deals.
Right now about 80% of HBO's and Cinemax's content is in hi-def; net expects a similar ratio across all its spinoff nets once the rollout is complete.
Eventually, net could offer all of its on-demand programming in hi-def, though HBO execs declined to comment on whether it would undertake such a move.
Execs at the net said its upscale-audience profile and reputation for improvements like on-demand were driving the move. "Our customers expect this," HBO co-prexy Eric Kessler said.
With the cost of updating to HD sets and services still high, some consumers have been wary of HD, but Kessler said the net will make a big push to market the service. "When we launched on-demand we had to educate consumers on how they could access the value of it. We expect the same thing here."
While nets like ESPN have invested heavily in hi-def programming, this move marks the most channels that one net has converted to HD.
I really hope HBO/Cinemax on-demand content goes Hi-Def. If I'm watching and enjoying the programmed HBO family of channels in HD, there is no reason I would every want to view lower-quality SD on-demand offerings ... What's the incentive to the HD customer to use their on-demand?
cygnusloop
06-13-07, 10:37 PM
I guess they aren't too worried about making the 100 channel mark, if they left 15 available HD channels sitting on the table.
Don't think so:
DirecTV has 31 Premium Channels at an add on cost of $46.00 a month.
DISH has 42 Premium Channels at an add on cost of $40.00 a month
BHN Cable has 54 Premium Channels at an add on cost of $26.95 a month
So DirecTV is the highest cost per channel for premiums.
That's why you subscribe to Premier.It's alot cheaper than $46.:rolleyes:
paulman182
06-14-07, 08:03 AM
I guess they aren't too worried about making the 100 channel mark, if they left 15 available HD channels sitting on the table.
Right, it seems to me D* needs ALL the HBO HD channels, both to make their numerical goal and to solidify the HD "image" they are seeking.
kevinwmsn
06-14-07, 09:26 AM
Maybe they are holding out till D11 is launched and operational before adding the other ones. They probably want to get a good sampling of various networks on D10. 11 HBOs/Cinemax in HD will be nice, means I'll keep my HBO now. We still need HBO Comedy added at least the SD Version.
cygnusloop
06-14-07, 10:09 AM
Maybe they are holding out till D11 is launched and operational before adding the other ones. They probably want to get a good sampling of various networks on D10. 11 HBOs/Cinemax in HD will be nice, means I'll keep my HBO now. We still need HBO Comedy added at least the SD Version.
Maybe. Maybe they don't have an existing carriage deal for the additional extended line up yet (beyond what they already carry in SD). Holding out until D11 is up makes some sense, I suppose.
My observation was that they would likely be going after at least *some* of the 15 outstanding channels if they were concerned that they were going to miss the "100 channels by the end of the year" mark. I think most would agree that it would be a marketing disaster for them if they don't, at least, get very, very close to 100 new HD channels when the calender rolls over.
I am just curious what they have up their sleeve that makes them unconcerned about meeting their stated goal.
bonscott87
06-14-07, 01:14 PM
I am just curious what they have up their sleeve that makes them unconcerned about meeting their stated goal.
I don't have any information but I think there are a couple things yet to be announced:
1) Showtime hasn't stepped up yet. That could bring another 5 or so. I mean can Showtime let themselves be trumped by Starz?
2) There has been a long time rumor that Fox was putting together a "Voom" like service and Ken H over on AVS seemed to agree with that rumor. I think Scott G from Satguys even said it was a pretty good rumor. It's been very quiet on that front for a while but it wouldn't suprise me for them to suprise with 10 or so channels like that. We'll see.
oldschoolecw
06-14-07, 05:26 PM
I guess how I should have stated my self in the first place was like this.
I was hoping for these channels to be added to our programming in HD also.
HBO Comedy HD
Thriller Max HD
5 Star Max HD
Outer Max HD
Sho Beyond HD
Sho Next HD
Not *that's* what I'm talking about. Between those and 5 Starz channels in HD I'm all set.
And Kudo's to Swanni for actually getting a scoop vs. just copying from the forums. I haven't seen this anywhere else today.
Well I'm more than a little perturbed that the trend for new HD channels is heavily biased towards premium channel content so far. Starz, HBO, I don't currently get them, and I don't plan on it, but I am paying for HD at $10/month. Wheres the bone for me? Where is SpeedHD, Golf channel HD, Spike HD, RSn HD etc etc etc? I am paying good money for HD content, and I expect to see some improvements for non-premium content or I may need to exercise my consumer muscle and shop around. With these recent price hikes cable is not so bad a thought to me any more, and they do have quite a bit of HD content.
Well I'm more than a little perturbed that the trend for new HD channels is heavily biased towards premium channel content so far. Starz, HBO, I don't currently get them, and I don't plan on it, but I am paying for HD at $10/month. Wheres the bone for me? Where is SpeedHD, Golf channel HD, Spike HD, RSn HD etc etc etc? I am paying good money for HD content, and I expect to see some improvements for non-premium content or I may need to exercise my consumer muscle and shop around. With these recent price hikes cable is not so bad a thought to me any more, and they do have quite a bit of HD content.I'm not sure what "trend" you are seeing, because it's just not the case. Have you seen this thread: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=80202 ?
It's filled with RSNs and non-premium channels ...
bonscott87
06-15-07, 05:26 AM
I was about to say, the trend has actually been the other way around. Just now are we getting announcements from premium movie channels. Dozens of non movie channels have been announced for months.
Titan25
06-15-07, 08:14 AM
Maybe they are holding out till D11 is launched and operational before adding the other ones. They probably want to get a good sampling of various networks on D10. 11 HBOs/Cinemax in HD will be nice, means I'll keep my HBO now. We still need HBO Comedy added at least the SD Version.
The HBO press release also stated that the HD converions of all of the multiplex channels would not be complete until sometime in 2008. It may be that HBO has agreed to deliver the current 11 channels to DirecTV first, and by year's end.
lwilli201
06-15-07, 08:03 PM
Does anyone have any idea how D* is going to number all the new HD Channels?
RobertE
06-15-07, 08:17 PM
Does anyone have any idea how D* is going to number all the new HD Channels?
How about Roman Numerals? No conflicts with current numbers then. :icon_lol:
davring
06-15-07, 08:25 PM
Does anyone have any idea how D* is going to number all the new HD Channels?
I was wondering the same thing today. There was a long thread a while back that ended nowhere, if I remember correctly
Titan25
06-15-07, 08:31 PM
Does anyone have any idea how D* is going to number all the new HD Channels?
There is really only two possibilities...
For channels with corresponding SD versions they can either simply use the same numbers as the SD versions, and numbers in the appropriate "normal" range for those that don't.
The other option is to place them all in a block in some 4 digit number range, like 2XXX.
Neither approach will please everybody.
There is really only two possibilities...
For channels with corresponding SD versions they can either simply use the same numbers as the SD versions, and numbers in the appropriate "normal" range for those that don't.
The other option is to place them all in a block in some 4 digit number range, like 2XXX.
Neither approach will please everybody.There are actually many other possibilities, also certain not to please anyone. For example, renumber all channels and group all SD channels together and all HD channels together. Or renumber all channels and alternate SD/HD, SD/HD, etc. See? There are many ways this can be messed up ... ;)
They can also use the uglier OTA numbering method, and make the SD's 622-0, e.g.
I'd rather see a totally logical renumbering take place, however, as painful as that might be. Years ago when I was a cable subscriber, UACC (now part of Cablevision) renumbered us twice in 15 years, IIRC. There were a lot fewer channels to deal with back then, however. /s
jclarke9999
06-16-07, 12:25 PM
They can also use the uglier OTA numbering method, and make the SD's 622-0, e.g.
I'd rather see a totally logical renumbering take place, however, as painful as that might be. Years ago when I was a cable subscriber, UACC (now part of Cablevision) renumbered us twice in 15 years, IIRC. There were a lot fewer channels to deal with back then, however. /s
I'd think I'd like to see a re-numbering (as much as their contracts will allow, anyway). My wife on the other hand......
I'd think I'd like to see a re-numbering (as much as their contracts will allow, anyway). My wife on the other hand......I know. It's an ugly thought. May have to be done tho. :eek2: /s
lucky13
06-16-07, 12:40 PM
Originally Posted by jclarke9999
I'd think I'd like to see a re-numbering (as much as their contracts will allow, anyway). My wife on the other hand......
I know. It's an ugly thought. May have to be done tho. /s
It will be OK as long as they don't renumber HGTV and the Soap Net.
Titan25
06-16-07, 03:13 PM
There are actually many other possibilities, also certain not to please anyone. For example, renumber all channels and group all SD channels together and all HD channels together. Or renumber all channels and alternate SD/HD, SD/HD, etc. See? There are many ways this can be messed up ... ;)
Putting all the HD together, with or without renumbering, is one of the options I set forth.
If they intermingle SD and HD, even if they were to renumber, there is no reason to alternate numbers. For one thing, not every SD will have a HD version (and vice versa). For another, it is MUCH simpler to just have channels with HD and SD versions use the same channel number.
They can also use the uglier OTA numbering method, and make the SD's 622-0, e.g.
I'd rather see a totally logical renumbering take place, however, as painful as that might be. Years ago when I was a cable subscriber, UACC (now part of Cablevision) renumbered us twice in 15 years, IIRC. There were a lot fewer channels to deal with back then, however. /s
I don't think that would work...the remotes included with the first gen of HD receivers don't have a way to enter a "dash".
Generally, I doubt any wholescale renumbering will happen.
RobertE
06-16-07, 04:17 PM
Putting all the HD together, with or without renumbering, is one of the options I set forth.
If they intermingle SD and HD, even if they were to renumber, there is no reason to alternate numbers. For one thing, not every SD will have a HD version (and vice versa). For another, it is MUCH simpler to just have channels with HD and SD versions use the same channel number.
I don't think that would work...the remotes included with the first gen of HD receivers don't have a way to enter a "dash".
Generally, I doubt any wholescale renumbering will happen.
The first gen HD recievers are going to be SOL for the new HD content anyway.
I still like Roman Numerals for the new channels. :hurah:
Newshawk
06-16-07, 10:06 PM
The first gen HD recievers are going to be SOL for the new HD content anyway.
I still like Roman Numerals for the new channels. :hurah:
I'm just afraid that in that case the audio would be in Latin! :lol:
Rathmir
06-19-07, 10:02 PM
guess i need to start diggin' around in the garage for those BBC's
No need to look for the BBC. DTV can send you some for free.
EaglePC
07-15-07, 02:59 PM
The Weather Channel in HD is going to be a sight for soar eyes ,can't wait...
The Weather Channel in HD is going to be a sight for soar eyes ,can't wait...
Better yet would be the AccuWeather Channel in HD...there are some lookers on there. :eek2:
Better yet would be the AccuWeather Channel in HD...there are some lookers on there. :eek2:
NBC Weather Plus has them all beat, best of national weather and well as local weather.
Paul Secic
07-15-07, 03:49 PM
this is the article from Variety:
In his first public act as HBO's permanent CEO, Bill Nelson announced that the company would be upgrading all of its nets to high-def by the middle of 2008.
Initiative, which is expected to cost in the tens of millions of dollars, will see the net offer HD programming on all 26 of its so-called multiplexes; those nets include HBO channels such as HBO Comedy and HBO Family and Cinemax nets such as ActionMAX and ThrillerMAX.
Only HBO and Cinemax offer hi-def feeds.
Many of the multiplex nets are driven by theatrical movies, a format that particularly lends itself to hi-def.
DirecTV is expected to announce today that it will be the first operator to carry the HBO nets in HD. HBO is in negotiations with other cable and satellite operators for similar deals.
Right now about 80% of HBO's and Cinemax's content is in hi-def; net expects a similar ratio across all its spinoff nets once the rollout is complete.
Eventually, net could offer all of its on-demand programming in hi-def, though HBO execs declined to comment on whether it would undertake such a move.
Execs at the net said its upscale-audience profile and reputation for improvements like on-demand were driving the move. "Our customers expect this," HBO co-prexy Eric Kessler said.
With the cost of updating to HD sets and services still high, some consumers have been wary of HD, but Kessler said the net will make a big push to market the service. "When we launched on-demand we had to educate consumers on how they could access the value of it. We expect the same thing here."
While nets like ESPN have invested heavily in hi-def programming, this move marks the most channels that one net has converted to HD.
Watch our rates shoot sky high for HBO. I'll just drop two tiers down.
tonyd79
07-15-07, 03:56 PM
Watch our rates shoot sky high for HBO. I'll just drop two tiers down.
Why? Where did you get that from? A pay service like HBO would be looking to increase its subs with more HD. Raising prices will knock them down. Especially since most providers charge the same for HBO as they do other movie channels and bundle them as you buy more.
NBC Weather Plus has them all beat, best of national weather and well as local weather.
Yeah, I think that's what it is. It's on my NBC affiliates 2nd station - I think it's from AccuWeather.
I'm not sure if it has been mentioned, but the easy fix for the renumbering is to put all the HD channels should be 70-200 or 100-200. Simple as that.
The Weather Channel in HD is going to be a sight for soar eyes ,can't wait...Remember that it won't go live until some time in 2008. Until then, DIRECTV will be faking it.
I'm not sure if it has been mentioned, but the easy fix for the renumbering is to put all the HD channels should be 70-200 or 100-200. Simple as that.
I hope whatever numbering system D comes up with they keep all the HD channels together. That's where everyone is going to be anyway :D
Remember that it won't go live until some time in 2008. Until then, DIRECTV will be faking it.
Harsh, IIRC, Weather Channel will be the content provider that supplies a HD channel to D* but is doing the upconvert, so D* is just passing along what they are given. Please go to the E* forums and troll there.
Earl Bonovich
07-15-07, 05:58 PM
You all do realize, that they don't have to stick with 1 numbering.
As the system can have more then one number for a channel..
I am of the "favor" of they make the HD channel the same number as the SD channel... If I am on an HD system, it will tune the HD offering... (unless I go to the guide, and opt for the SD version)..
Just like it is now for the Locals.
They can also have the HD's all grouped together somewhere else as well.
As the HBO-HD has two channel numbers, but it is only there 1 time in the feed.
You all do realize, that they don't have to stick with 1 numbering.
As the system can have more then one number for a channel..
I am of the "favor" of they make the HD channel the same number as the SD channel... If I am on an HD system, it will tune the HD offering... (unless I go to the guide, and opt for the SD version)..
Just like it is now for the Locals.
They can also have the HD's all grouped together somewhere else as well.
As the HBO-HD has two channel numbers, but it is only there 1 time in the feed.
This idea has my support too Earl!.Think that it is a great idea!.;)
VeniceDre
07-15-07, 07:17 PM
They can also have the HD's all grouped together somewhere else as well.
As the HBO-HD has two channel numbers, but it is only there 1 time in the feed.
I'd rather see them grouped this way. I tend to go to the HD channels first then look at SD content.
Paul Secic
07-16-07, 03:23 PM
Why? Where did you get that from? A pay service like HBO would be looking to increase its subs with more HD. Raising prices will knock them down. Especially since most providers charge the same for HBO as they do other movie channels and bundle them as you buy more.
HD cost more to convert. Wait & see. Just a hunch my friend.
You all do realize, that they don't have to stick with 1 numbering.
As the system can have more then one number for a channel..
I am of the "favor" of they make the HD channel the same number as the SD channel... If I am on an HD system, it will tune the HD offering... (unless I go to the guide, and opt for the SD version)..
Just like it is now for the Locals.
They can also have the HD's all grouped together somewhere else as well.
As the HBO-HD has two channel numbers, but it is only there 1 time in the feed.
Earl: Your way would be good as well :)
They're probably saving that spot for QVCHD :lol:
QVC is actually going to broadcast in HD so you can actually see how crappy their stuff really is??!?!
djwww98
07-29-07, 10:47 AM
I hope whatever numbering system D comes up with they keep all the HD channels together. That's where everyone is going to be anyway :D
I personnaly don't see why HD should be grouped together. I would rather see like channels grouped together... News channels in a group, sports in a group, documentarys in a group, etc. If some are HD and some are not, so what? You will know if it's HD or not. Just my opinion. As has been mentioned, if they could assign more than one number to each channel and do it both ways, great.
I personnaly don't see why HD should be grouped together. I would rather see like channels grouped together... News channels in a group, sports in a group, documentarys in a group, etc. If some are HD and some are not, so what? You will know if it's HD or not. Just my opinion. As has been mentioned, if they could assign more than one number to each channel and do it both ways, great.There are those who want the HD channels grouped together simply to make guide browsing easier, because all the HD channels are together. However, no matter where DIRECTV puts the HD channels, grouped or not, it will be very easy to see all the HD channels "grouped" together in the guide without even needing to create a custom favorites group. The answer? Simply use the Channel Filter to select "HDTV Channels".
There are those who want the HD channels grouped together simply to make guide browsing easier, because all the HD channels are together. However, no matter where DIRECTV puts the HD channels, grouped or not, it will be very easy to see all the HD channels "grouped" together in the guide without even needing to create a custom favorites group. The answer? Simply use the Channel Filter to select "HDTV Channels".
Exactamoundo!.Gee! someone knew what they were doing when they invented the
"Guide Filters"!.;):hurah:
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.