1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DIRECTV HD Channel Anticipation (Official Q4-12 Thread)

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Mike Bertelson, Sep 24, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Oct 4, 2012 #121 of 808
    ep1974

    ep1974 Legend

    631
    20
    May 22, 2010
    Hope that's not the case. Still hoping for HLN, H2, FMC, LMN and TVLAND in HD.
     
  2. Oct 4, 2012 #122 of 808
    Drucifer

    Drucifer Well-Known Member

    9,404
    244
    Feb 12, 2009
    NY Hudson...
    If may eyes can't notice the difference then I would consider UHD a waste of my money.
     
  3. Oct 4, 2012 #123 of 808
    bobnielsen

    bobnielsen Éminence grise

    8,473
    92
    Jun 29, 2006
    Bainbridge...
    That's my situation. In fact, I can barely distinguish between decent 480i/p (i.e., DVD quality, not the Directv SD kind), 720p and 1080i on my 37 in. display. I don't plan on getting UHD at all.
     
  4. Oct 4, 2012 #124 of 808
    DViper2399

    DViper2399 AllStar

    73
    0
    Jul 16, 2008
    How about stations start to broadcast in 1080P before we even begin to talk about 4K, most non-ppv stations air in 1080i or 720p
     
  5. Oct 4, 2012 #125 of 808
    Ken984

    Ken984 Active Member

    1,152
    9
    Dec 31, 2005
    Bossier...
    I do not think 1080p for broadcast will happen. The cost to upgrade the infrastructure would be high. Broadcast would require a new standard for 1080p and with 4k or 8k on the horizon they would not want to have to upgrade twice. There is not that big of a difference in 1080i and 1080p.
     
  6. Oct 4, 2012 #126 of 808
    Davenlr

    Davenlr Geek til I die

    9,136
    27
    Sep 16, 2006
    1080p was added to the ATSC spec a while ago, but as far as I know, none of the receivers implement it, nor do any of the broadcasters transmit it.

    As far as difference, not much as far as apparent resolution, but for fast moving sports, I can imagine there would be a LOT less pixellation.
     
  7. Oct 4, 2012 #127 of 808
    djrobx

    djrobx Godfather

    507
    2
    Jan 26, 2009
    Heh - I always wondered why they started doing HD channels at 1080i and 720p when they were compressing the crap out of SD.

    While I'm happy that the "real" HD lineup has grown to what it is, SD could have been DVD quality and anamorphic 16:9. Most things would have been a heck of a lot more watchable, even on larger TVs.

    As for 4K, I'm not really sure. Unless you truly have a theater-size room in your home, I think we're getting into the land of diminishing returns, not unlike the audio CD. Sure, there's SACD and DVD-Audio but people went for the convenience of lesser-quality MP3s instead.
     
  8. Oct 5, 2012 #128 of 808
    PrinceLH

    PrinceLH New Member

    490
    8
    Feb 18, 2003
    I agree. I bought in to SACD and DVD-A. They were great formats that didn't deserve to die. I have about 30 of those disks and each one is remarkable.
     
  9. Oct 5, 2012 #129 of 808
    SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot Godfather

    1,348
    37
    Jan 6, 2009
    http://www.twice.com/articletype/news/ihs-initial-4k-lcd-tv-sales-be-marginal/103445

    IHS: Initial 4K LCD TV Sales To Be Marginal
    By Greg Tarr On Oct 4 2012 - 12:57pm

    El Segundo, Calif. — Consumer demand for new 4K ultra-high-definition TV displays will remain quite small for at least the next five years, according to a new study released by market research firm IHS iSuppli.

    The IHS iSuppli “Television Market Tracker Report” said shipments of high-profile 4K displays from Sony, LG, Toshiba and others will remain less than 1 percent of the global LCD TV market for at least the next half decade, before worldwide shipments climb to 2.1 million units in 2017, (or 0.8 percent of the global LCD TV supply). That will be up from just 4,000 units that are expected to sell this year, the study predicts.

    LCD TVs are called “4K” or ultra-high-definition when they have a dense pixel structure of 3,840 by 2,160 dots, or four times the pixel count of today’s FullHD 1,920 by 1,080p TVs.

    Introductions of 84-inch 4K LCD televisions were recently announced by Sony ($25,000 suggested retail) and LG Electronics ($20,000). Toshiba offers a 55-inch model at $10,000 in Japan.

    Hisense and Konka of China have also announced plans for 84-inch 4K sets later this year.

    However, IHS said it believes that neither consumers nor television brands will have the interest required to make the 4K LCD TV market successful.

    “If you have a television that is 60 inches or larger and are watching video that has a 3,840 by 2,160 resolution, then a 4K television makes sense,” said Tom Morrod, IHS TV systems and technology research director. “However, a very limited amount of content is available at the 4K resolution. Meanwhile, because of high prices and other issues, the market for super-sized, 60-inch and larger sets is very small — at only about 1.5 percent of total television shipments in 2012. Furthermore, for most people, the 1,080p resolution is good enough. Because of these factors, combined with the massive price tags, the market for 4K sets during the next few years will be limited to very wealthy consumers or to commercial uses.”

    He added that 4K LCD sets may serve the high-end of the TV market as transitional technologies until AMOLED TVs arrive in the mass market.

    “The 4K sets can fill the gap at the high-end of television brands’ product lines until the arrival of the next-generation AMOLED TVs,” Morrod said.

    “Japanese brands are offering 4K product because they need to have a competitive alternative to the AMOLED TVs being sold by their rivals in South Korea, Samsung and LG Electronics. Meanwhile, the South Korean companies are having difficulties producing AMOLED panels, saying they will need two more years to achieve competitive volume and pricing. Therefore, the Korean brands are offering 4K sets as a transitional step until their AMOLED televisions are more widely available.”
     
  10. Oct 5, 2012 #130 of 808
    MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,447
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    From what I have read the difference between 4K and 1080p can only be seen on screens larger than 55" with the viewer being seated close to the TV. That in itself will place limits on the demand for 4K. Not to mention the steep prices for 4K TVs, our poor economy, high unemployment rate and limited 4K source material. 4K is a improvement but I don't anticipate it making as big a splash as HD did.
     
  11. Oct 5, 2012 #131 of 808
    SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot Godfather

    1,348
    37
    Jan 6, 2009
    As a point of reference (and I realize these are not Directv numbers) in the Voom v Dish lawsuit info came out this week that Dish had 30,000 HD subs when the Voom Channels appeared on Dish (somewhere in early 2005 range - I don't feel like tracking down the exact date) and when Voom was dropped in 2008 Dish had 1.3 Million HD Subs.

    IIRC, Dish had about 14 Million subs in 2008, so less than 10% even then were HD subs.

    The percentages fall in line with what other MSOs had stated and Directv's number would probably only vary +/- 1%.
     
  12. Oct 5, 2012 #132 of 808
    twiseguy

    twiseguy Legend

    206
    13
    Jan 31, 2011
    Stow, Ohio
    But I thought 3D was "The next big thing!"
    Isn`t that why Direct TV fired up all those many 3D channels?
     
  13. Oct 5, 2012 #133 of 808
    mreposter

    mreposter Hall Of Fame

    1,711
    1
    Jul 29, 2006
    Sometimes the "next big thing" fizzles out. If they can come up with a glasses-free implementation of 3D, maybe it'll take off, but so far there just hasn't been enough demand from customers for 3D.
     
  14. Oct 5, 2012 #134 of 808
    georule

    georule Hall Of Fame

    1,603
    5
    Mar 31, 2010
    I know, right? When they got to 100 channels in 3D, I thought, wow, that's really excessive.

    Wait. It is actually like, what, 3?

    This would appear to be another of those "If I don't want it, nobody should have it" scenarios.
     
  15. Oct 5, 2012 #135 of 808
    gpollock87

    gpollock87 Legend

    131
    0
    Apr 13, 2011
    FEARnet HD
     
  16. Oct 5, 2012 #136 of 808
    stevester23

    stevester23 Mentor

    38
    0
    Sep 4, 2011
    3D is a gimmicky fad...Now back to anticipation

    FMC...Encore Action/Dramma..PAC 12

    Plex channels will probably be rolled out right before the next price increase to ease the complaints.
     
  17. Oct 5, 2012 #137 of 808
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    What model display do you have for your primary viewing?
     
  18. Oct 5, 2012 #138 of 808
    PrinceLH

    PrinceLH New Member

    490
    8
    Feb 18, 2003
    I am also starting to wonder, if 3D is going to be a fad that will disappear, in a couple of years. People don't seem to be going out of their way, to buy into this format, when they purchase new T.V.'s. I think eventually, we'll have a projection system, that will be 3D, without the glasses, using holographic imaging.
     
  19. Oct 5, 2012 #139 of 808
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    And flying cars.


    Where are the flying cars? I was promised flying cars.
     
  20. Oct 5, 2012 #140 of 808
    wmb

    wmb Godfather

    469
    5
    Dec 17, 2008
    Granted my Strabismus limits my interest in 3D, but it would seem that to be successful, 3D would need to be an immersive experience. In most movie theatres, you are sitting within one screen width of the screen. WIth TV, optimal/typical viewing positioni is 2 times screen size. It just does not seem you will get the depth effect desired with a typical TV set up. Seems that would limit the desirability.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page