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

DIRECTV Re: OTA: "We Will Have a Dual Tuner Solution"

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Tom Robertson, Oct 28, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dec 6, 2007 #741 of 1344
    GP245

    GP245 Godfather

    268
    0
    Aug 17, 2006

    Earl -

    You're being harsh and shortsighted.

    First of all, not everyone has a computer available where they have a television set when they want to obtain local weather reports.

    By the way, that's an area on which satellite should work! Technically to be able to insert local information.

    Second, sub-channel programming is relatively in its infancy. As carriage grows so will the quality of programming.

    As a televsion marketing consultant, I truly believe that there will be programming on the sub-channels that the audience will find valuable.

    You shouldn't dismiss their worth.
     
  2. Dec 6, 2007 #742 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Tony's point here about bandwidth is basically sound on one level with potential caveats. If DIRECTV receives the signal OTA, they could spend more money (just as the regional cable companies would have to) to receive and re-encode more streams, without greatly affecting the bandwidth they might have reserved for a full stream HD channel. (If they reserved fullstream...)

    The caveat is if DIRECTV is getting a fibre optic feed of the main channel at full bitrate, any subchannels DIRECTV also received could add to the bandwidth requirement. I do not know of any such circomstances, I just know it is possible.

    Happy Holidays!
    Tom
     
  3. Dec 6, 2007 #743 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    Just a reminder: not everybody can even GET cable! I certainly can't, and I'm only semi-rural and within a few miles of several cities. So for folks like me, DTV or Dish are virtual monopolies.

    Also, Tony made the important point but it needs to be amplified upon: We all live under this insane FCC ruling of a few years back which PROHIBITS US from getting any "distant" network stations (meaning any network channels at all) if they exist LOCALLY OTA!

    Since DTV has failed to provide any of us with a full local-into-local full spectrum national network HD service, therefore OTA capability becomes not a luxury, BUT A NECESSITY!

    FCC takes away distant nets, DTV takes away OTA nets. Result: ZERO HD NETS for many of us who have not yet received local-into-local HD, and the ultimate Soup Nazi response to everyone vis a vis HD public television: NO PBS-HD FOR YOU!

    Network television is still the most-watched programming in America. And with the HR21, DTV has just gone a long way towards blocking many us from it. Way to go geniuses!
     
  4. Dec 6, 2007 #744 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Where am I being Harsh and Shortsighted?
    I full understand that fact that there is a significant population that wants/needs OTA.

    Just posting my particular observations on my particular sub-channel offerings here in Chicago.

    And sorry... but I would absolutely love to see the numbers on those that have HDTV's and higher end technology for the entertainment systems, that don't have at least 1 computer to tap to the internet...

    -----
    So when sub-channel programming get's out of its infancy... then it will be something to concern.

    I am not dismissing the "concept" of sub-channels....
    But as of today... the sub-channels don't have that content.

    The exact same argument made for the last 5ish years about HD... the content wasn't there... so why should the money be spent?

    Who is to say that when their is the shift in the demand for HD vs SD... and then SD local feeds can be dropped, because they are carried on the HD side of it... that those important... content full Sub-channels can not be carried?

    But I can NEVER see the day when DirecTV is going to re-braodcast the "weather" sub-channels, and possibly even the nitch sub-channels that re-broadcast the same things multiple times over and over and over.

    That could be an avenue where DoD could come into play....
    Or the Internet Access points on the receiver.

    But bandwith in the sat-signal stream is still a premium that is not easily increased.

    And it is not just the sat-signal from DirecTV to consumers... but the backhauling between source and DirecTV....
     
  5. Dec 6, 2007 #745 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Last time I checked...

    You are still able to purchase a TiVo-HD or TiVo-Series 3....
    To record and watch your OTA broadcasts...

    They haven't "blocked" you from anything.

    Just because you don't have it all in one unit, at one nice neat tiny price...

    Everyone has different factors that come into play.... no one person is the same as the next.

    For many years at the start with DirecTV... I had to have both Cable and DirecTV as they didn't carry my locals... but it was still beneficial to have all the other channels that my cable-co didn't carry.

    It again boils down to the percentages...

    DirecTV will never have 100% of the customer base...
    Heck they only have 17mil subscribers out of the more then 100mil possible.

    So if they ultimately end up with a solution that precludes certain combination of factors, it is a percentage game...

    There will NEVER be a single carrier that meets everyone needs...
    There will NEVER be a single unit/hardware that meets everyone needs...

    It all comes down to the percentages and the numbers.

    -------

    As for your comment about the FCC... well when was the last time they did something that benefitted the consumer?
     
  6. Dec 6, 2007 #746 of 1344
    Lee L

    Lee L Hall Of Fame

    3,134
    0
    Aug 15, 2002
    I am sure it is different everywhere and I do not have cable so I cannot say for sure, but from what I have read in the newspaper, on AVSForums Local thread for this area and heard from other people is that Time Warner has the subchannels here. I know each year during the NCAA tournament when WRAL runs all the 4 games on the subchannels (woo-hoo, no paying $40 for Mega March Madness or whatver it is called) and therefore no HD coverage for any games, that Time Warner also carries a fifth WRAL channel of the standard HD feed for this area that you cannot even get OTA.



    As far as Cable boxes not having OTA inputs, you are right, but in many business, companies struggle to get an advantage over a competitor or to differentiate themselves. I think many would argue that having OTA on a Sat box is just that.
     
  7. Dec 6, 2007 #747 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    The PBS subchannels here in Monterey County are significant and extremely cool. Beyond that, the NBC local has a nice 24-hour weather subchannel. All the more reason to love OTA. And all the more reason to be po'd that DTV won't let us timeshift them in the very recorder we paid for with our hard-earned money. The same money that a month earlier would have bought us that capability.

    I've been wracking my brain trying to think of a single major electronic product that ever significantly decontented and maintained the same price point. Probably because there are either laws against bait-and-switch or the public would never stand for it. We're the public who won't stand for it.
     
  8. Dec 6, 2007 #748 of 1344
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    But the problem does exist.

    Why won't admit just this once that DirecTV made a mistake.

    They cannot reliably satisfy their customers because they released the HR21 before the mechanisms were in place to support the distribution of two systems with different capabilities.

    I am not debating the issue of having two systems in the wild, which increases maintenance and distribution costs (that seems to be forgotten every time the HR21 issue is debated). That in itself is a problem, but to not have the support mechanisms in place before deployment is a costly mistake.
     
  9. Dec 6, 2007 #749 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    Oh sure, and I'm also free to build and send up my own satellites into orbit and create my own private TV network. Yes, we are so free I can't stand it.
     
  10. Dec 6, 2007 #750 of 1344
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Too easy.

    DirecTV benefits from an FCC ruling every day. The small dish ruling.

    And there is always the cablecard mandate that makes quite a few Tivo customers happy.
     
  11. Dec 6, 2007 #751 of 1344
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Another thing about DirecTV and OTA.

    Unless the plan on pulling guide data for the existing systems out there (which would be a first on any platform for DirecTV), they still have to maintain all that structure.

    The ONLY cost they are negating is the production cost of OTA hardware and software.

    So, any arguments about the cost of maintaining OTA "service" are moot unless you are saying DirecTV is going to pull that service sometime soon.
     
  12. Dec 6, 2007 #752 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    The marginal increase in cost, to include the guide data there.
    Is not even close to the same level of maintaining support for the hardware and interacting with that hardware....

    And the royalties involved for the ATSC technology... ect....
     
  13. Dec 6, 2007 #753 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Because I don't think they made a mistake....

    But why not admit that there are valid arguments for both sides of this coin?

    Why not let me have my opinion on it, instead of telling me that I am wrong and you are right?

    I haven't once stated anyone was wrong for their opinion on this topic, just that I have a different opinion on it... and point out WHY I have a different opinion on it?
     
  14. Dec 6, 2007 #754 of 1344
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    But the costs of this dual delivery of different hardware is nothing, huh? I don't buy it. I have been involved in too much analysis of costs of purchasing, stocking, inventorying and maintaining even small components of slightly different nature. Entire units are geometrically more costly.

    And the cost of installing or delivering the wrong equipment. The phone calls about HR20 versus HR21 being delivered. All those costs are nothing, I assume?

    I give up. Sometimes you just rah-rah whatever DirecTV wants to do. This is one of those times. I haven't yet seen you admit that they messed up in not having either a solid distribution system of both types of systems or the OTA add-on for the HR20 ready before deployment.

    All is well.
     
  15. Dec 6, 2007 #755 of 1344
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD

    Defend their messed up distribution system. Defend that they will not ensure that a customer who wants or needs OTA will get an H20 or an HR20.

    Tell me that is not a mistake.

    Then I will understand that your opinion is not based in reality.
     
  16. Dec 6, 2007 #756 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    What that FCC small dish ruling was what 10 years ago?
    And in fact... they gave it just enough loop holes, that penalize those in Association based housing.

    And similar with the Cable-Card... they left it with an "out" that is now being exploited by cable-co's... Switched Video...

    "Theoretical Cable-Card" should have been in place the moment we got cable-ready TV's...

    But the FCC discussion is a topic for another day, another thread.
     
  17. Dec 6, 2007 #757 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005

    Distribution system is what it is....
    It didn't change because of the HR21... it stayed the same.

    So the "mistake" was done LONG LONG ago... and has nothing to do with the HR21 or the H21.

    So the only "mistake" there... was that they didn't re-organize their entire logistics and distribution method... which would have taken a very long time to do...

    Still doesn't change the fact that release the HR21, instead of letting them pile up in a wharehouse somewhere... wasn't a mistake.

    Could they have done something better to ensure that all the people that absolutey need/want to have an OTA solution can have one... at the moment they receive their system...

    Sure...


    One way to fix it right now:
    Stop selling any HR2X unit to anyone that has that need, until the solution is ready.... problem solved.

    Then there will be no more confusion, no more issues.
    Then re-instate the sales, when there is no chance of an issue... those that want OTA... can have OTA.

    But at the end of the day... that would still mean those that want OTA... won't have OTA.
     
  18. Dec 6, 2007 #758 of 1344
    houskamp

    houskamp Active Member

    8,636
    3
    Sep 14, 2006
    I would very much suspect that the lack of locals here (lin networks) has a lot to do with the lack of Directv dishes in my area.. If it wasn't for the OTA capability in my Directv recievers I highly doubt I would have them at all..
    Also as soon as the OTA 'solution' is avalible I will be at the front of the line to get it for my 21...
     
  19. Dec 6, 2007 #759 of 1344
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    LOL. You may not realize it but you are painting a company completely out of control and making knee-jerk decisions as if things just happen to them.

    Yes, they couldn't foresee any issues when they decided to commit to the 21 series and design it and build it. Couldn't simply fix their distribution and inventory system. There had to be time involved there. It isn't like HR21's suddenly appeared on pallets without anyone knowing it was going to happen.

    Because companies distributing more than one widget don't ever have to deal with adjusting to new products in the distribution chain.

    Your spinning is making them look like worse managers than my suggestion that they made a simple mistake.
     
  20. Dec 6, 2007 #760 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    I'm sorry... I am not doing any painting....

    I don't think they are out of control... I think they are very much in control.
    And that some people are really getting bent over something that is not having any sort of impact on the significantly larger portion of their customer base.

    But hey...
    Your are going to reverse everything I post anyway...
    So what is the point?

    You have your opinion on what is going on...
    I have mine.

    I still don't think they made a mistake... in releasing the HR21 when they did... and I still don't think it is a mistake to have OTA removed from the 21 series.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page