DBSTalk Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

MPEG-4 Receivers-When? Beta yet?

4K views 60 replies 23 participants last post by  Jacob S 
#1 ·
Doesn't it take at least a year of Beta testing to get a receiver ready for the public? I just can't see how Dish's expectation of a Fall start for MPEG-4 HD channels can be done. Not only does the receiver and hopefully the DVR be ready but there are a multitude of receivers that have to be put in place.

Is anyone aware of any that are being Beta tested. Are there any model numbers or pictures avalable?
 
#28 ·
BFG said:
Ouch bringing the man's town into the discussion :)

So where's you're house at Simon?
:D Well - remember, we're NOT a DMA - we're stuck with the idiots in Colorado Springs (KRDO SUCKS). I'd be HAPPY to NOT be in ANY DMA. ;)

I hit the terraserver link, and believe it or not, my house is almost exactly dead center. Zoom in 1, north 1, in 1, north 1, east 1, in 1, north 1, in 1, north 1, east 1. I'm on the SE corner of the "T" intersection. It appears that my place was just under construction (1996-7) when that pic was shot.

As you can see, I live in a high-density subdivision. :) I mean, if I look hard in the right direction, I can actually see another house. ;)

And when people talk about LOS issues, my dishes are at the north end of the house so I can shoot over the trees (148 is shooting through a gap). When I go after 61.5, almost exactly SE, I'll have to hit a hole straight through 200 yds of trees because it's uphill in that direction. Some installers have to deal with buildings - we have to deal with granite. :D

And yes - there ARE a few @$$es in this town - but not as many as in any city. :)

The actual (unincorporated) town is an intersection a little fingernail above the center south border in the initial link. A dozen or so buildings is all. The 133 sq. mi. & 3K people is the area the post office serves. I used to say it said "Welcome to Florissant" on both sides of the sign, but then they actually put up signs - they're about a half-mile apart. :)
 
#29 ·
SimpleSimon said:
Ever hear of the law of diminishing returns? They're starting to get down into the DMAs with 40 people and 10,000 cows. But the bandwidth requirements are similar to some bigger DMAs. ENOUGH (waste) IS ENOUGH! :(
I don't disagree Simon, however I don't have enough data to say one way or another whether remaining DMA's that Dish does not serve would provide enough possible subs to justify the expense of the transponders needed to service it. You may be correct that some markets just aren't worth it, and I would think that Dish knows which one's they are and somewhere along the line, we'll see the end of that expansion, or some sort of overall consolidation of what really comprises a DMA at some other level if I had to guess.. maybe not..
 
#30 ·
If you are in one of 157 DMAs E* has enough DMAs covered. If you are in the other 53 DMAs E* could use one more ... :)

JL
 
#31 ·
justalurker said:
If you are in one of 157 DMAs E* has enough DMAs covered. If you are in the other 53 DMAs E* could use one more ... :)
What's really idiotic is some of the small DMAs. Look at 181, Harrisonburg, VA. It has 2 channels: ABC 3 WHSV and PBS 51 WVPT. It would make more sense to allow these people access to either the Charlottesville, VA, Roanoke, VA, or Washington, DC locals. It would be pretty pointless to offer JUST those 2 channels. Also, look at the DC locals. It is listed as Washington, DC/Hagerstown, MD locals. However, neither sat company has NBC 25 WHAG in their locals lineup, nor do they have PBS(like) 31 MPT. I get WHSV and WHAG on Adelphia cable in my area. I also get 3 Baltimore, MD stations on Adelphia.
 
#32 ·
larrystotler said:
What's really idiotic is some of the small DMAs. Look at 181, Harrisonburg, VA. It has 2 channels: ABC 3 WHSV and PBS 51 WVPT. It would make more sense to allow these people access to either the Charlottesville, VA, Roanoke, VA, or Washington, DC locals. It would be pretty pointless to offer JUST those 2 channels. Also, look at the DC locals. It is listed as Washington, DC/Hagerstown, MD locals. However, neither sat company has NBC 25 WHAG in their locals lineup, nor do they have PBS(like) 31 MPT. I get WHSV and WHAG on Adelphia cable in my area. I also get 3 Baltimore, MD stations on Adelphia.
Blame congress. They are the ones that set the rules and the DMAs. The best news is that once those two channel (or less) DMAs are added, the other channels can come in under SHVERA - congress' newest set of rules. Adding the remaining 53 DMAs is the next step in the process.

JL
 
#33 ·
While I am sure that E* enjoys an advantage in having 27 more DMAs than D*, it would make more sense in the long run for them to set aside part of 1 location and share the signals for the locals. This has been tossed around before, and the odds are about nill, but it would free up transponder space for them. Heck, you could even set up a stand alone company that could resell the locals to D*, E* or even the cable companies...........
 
#34 ·
larrystotler said:
While I am sure that E* enjoys an advantage in having 27 more DMAs than D*, it would make more sense in the long run for them to set aside part of 1 location and share the signals for the locals. This has been tossed around before, and the odds are about nill, but it would free up transponder space for them.
E* and D* wanted to do that as part of their merger, which was rejected by the FCC. The issue today (other than getting FCC permission) would be that E* and D* encrypt differently. One of them would have to accept the other's encryption and encoding for both of them to share signals.

JL
 
#35 ·
Mark or anyone who knows the answer: - What will the 129 be used for? I presently have a Dish 500 + a 61.5 dish. Will I need 129 to get all of the new Hd stuff or what? I am in the Washington, DC area.

da doug
 
#40 ·
datwell said:
Mark or anyone who knows the answer: - What will the 129 be used for? I presently have a Dish 500 + a 61.5 dish. Will I need 129 to get all of the new Hd stuff or what? I am in the Washington, DC area.
Since the 129 us a Canadian slot, the idea is to use it for Locals like D* is doing with the 72.5. They have only applied for 1 millions subscribers on that location, so they maye be getting ready to do a local channel shuffle. They could move some of the split locals off the 148 to the 129 to consolidate them and either repoint the 148, or replace it with the new dish design being rumored. Technically, so long as all your locals are on the 129, they can reuse the existing 148 dish, and do not have to replace the D500 wthe the new D750( :D )
 
#42 ·
They already had a 110/119/129 dish out which was like a SuperDish in a Pittsburg market so that they could get their locals.

Once DirecTv and Dish Network both go MPEG-4 then this would be the chance for them both to go the same encryption route so that they can share the satellite space that they have and kick cable's rearend.
 
#43 ·
Jacob, that dish was a KU-FSS dish that used the same sat that StarBand uses. This new slot is a Ku-DBS slot, and will work similar to the D* Plus and Phase 1/2/3 dieshes.

mattb - Sat companies do not have to offer a 1 dish solution. They must place all locals from 1 DMA on the same location. These locations can be any location. You do not have to get all your programming from the same dish. Also, the new ATSC Digital Locals can be on a seperate location from the NTSC Analog locals. You could technically have the D500, your analog locals on the 61.5 and your digital locals on the 148. 3 dishes, and it complies with the new law.
 
#44 ·
So basically Dish Network would be able to have the same size dish that DirecTv has for their locals phase 3 oval dish. That would be great if they could put all the locals from 105 and 121 to 129 so that everyone could have a smaller dish. Its a shame that Dish Network has to have such a large dish and not as good of a solution as DirecTv on getting everyone their locals.
 
#45 ·
That's going to depend on what E* has planned for AMC15 and E9. I believe the idea is that E* is saying that they can't get the 1 dish locals done unless they are allowed access to the 129, like D* has done with the 72.5. Having everything on 1 dish will also be a convience for the subs. There is going to be a pretty massive changeout starting sometime soon in order for E* to be able to comply with the new 1 location locals law. I'm fairly certain that in my area, the DC DMA, we will see all of our locals moved to the 110 from the 61.5 due to the size of the DMA. Some of the smaller locals will probably be moved off to the 61.5 or the 129. No official word yet.
 
#46 ·
larrystotler said:
mattb - Sat companies do not have to offer a 1 dish solution. They must place all locals from 1 DMA on the same location. These locations can be any location. You do not have to get all your programming from the same dish. Also, the new ATSC Digital Locals can be on a seperate location from the NTSC Analog locals. You could technically have the D500, your analog locals on the 61.5 and your digital locals on the 148. 3 dishes, and it complies with the new law.
Correct me if I am wrong but I thought that the provisions in the SHVERA legislation required that all locals in a single DMA had to be able to be received by a single dish not a single location and that if one subscribed to their locals they had to have that single dish installed. If this is true than Dish could put locals from one DMA at 110 and/or 119 and 129 (if Dish gets access to that slot) and still meet the SHVERA requirements. Dish could also split locals between 105/110/119 or 110/119/121 but dish would have to install Superdishes for folks wanting locals in those markets. Your example of requiring three dishes is correct. The markets that Dish has all the locals at 148 W are in compliance with SHVERA.
 
#47 ·
rocatman said:
Correct me if I am wrong but I thought that the provisions in the SHVERA legislation required that all locals in a single DMA had to be able to be received by a single dish not a single location and that if one subscribed to their locals they had to have that single dish installed. If this is true than Dish could put locals from one DMA at 110 and/or 119 and 129 (if Dish gets access to that slot) and still meet the SHVERA requirements. Dish could also split locals between 105/110/119 or 110/119/121 but dish would have to install Superdishes for folks wanting locals in those markets. Your example of requiring three dishes is correct. The markets that Dish has all the locals at 148 W are in compliance with SHVERA.
The changes only apply to locals that are spilt on 2 locations. In my DMA, we get 5 additional locals on the 61.5. So, E* would have to move them to the 110, OR they could move the 7 currently on the 110 to the 61.5. The 1 dish solutions are more for customer convience and acceptance. They can technically do what I posted earlier. And, with E* having slots all over the place, it would be possible that we will need more than 1 dish for all services.
 
#48 ·
larrystotler said:
That's going to depend on what E* has planned for AMC15 and E9. I believe the idea is that E* is saying that they can't get the 1 dish locals done unless they are allowed access to the 129, like D* has done with the 72.5. Having everything on 1 dish will also be a convience for the subs. There is going to be a pretty massive changeout starting sometime soon in order for E* to be able to comply with the new 1 location locals law. I'm fairly certain that in my area, the DC DMA, we will see all of our locals moved to the 110 from the 61.5 due to the size of the DMA. Some of the smaller locals will probably be moved off to the 61.5 or the 129. No official word yet.
I believe you mean E-10 which when launched to 110 W may solve most if not all of Dish's single dish for all locals in a market problem. Having access to 129 W may allow Dish to implement some HD sooner since it would provide an easier, less costly and more subscriber acceptable backup plan if anything were to happen to E-10. Otherwise Dish needs to rely on AMC-15 and AMC-16 as a backup for any problems with E-10. I don't think Dish will use 129 W for CONUS programming because the elevation angles especially in the Northeast are very low. It could be used for HD locals in the west perhaps even the largest markets including HD distant networks.
 
#49 ·
rocatman said:
I believe you mean E-10 which when launched to 110 W may solve most if not all of Dish's single dish for all locals in a market problem. Having access to 129 W may allow Dish to implement some HD sooner since it would provide an easier, less costly and more subscriber acceptable backup plan if anything were to happen to E-10. Otherwise Dish needs to rely on AMC-15 and AMC-16 as a backup for any problems with E-10. I don't think Dish will use 129 W for CONUS programming because the elevation angles especially in the Northeast are very low. It could be used for HD locals in the west perhaps even the largest markets including HD distant networks.
The application for the 129 is limited to one million subs. So, I seriously doubt it will be for many HD locals. E10 is still not up, and when it does become fully usable, E* will have to move their locals around. And, since the 129 is just an application, don't expect to see anything happen for at least 8-16 months. D* used an existing sat which they basically had to give to the Canadian compay that owns the slot so that they could access that location. All of this is still way up in the air, and further speculation isn't going to make it happen..............
 
#50 ·
larrystotler said:
The application for the 129 is limited to one million subs. So, I seriously doubt it will be for many HD locals. E10 is still not up, and when it does become fully usable, E* will have to move their locals around. And, since the 129 is just an application, don't expect to see anything happen for at least 8-16 months. D* used an existing sat which they basically had to give to the Canadian compay that owns the slot so that they could access that location. All of this is still way up in the air, and further speculation isn't going to make it happen..............
IIRC the agreement with the Canadian government require that the E-5 satellite be in place at 129 W by sometime in August 2005 and as long as the E-5 satellite has enough fuel which is extremely likely, the FCC almost has to approve it since they allowed DirecTV to use the 72.5 W Canadian slot. The one million subs is just a number that can be increased at anytime depending on need. In addition, E-5 is not a spotbeam satellite and Dish is only guaranteed 16 TPs (although I would expect them to get most of the 32 TP capacity) so not very many markets for HD locals could be provided from 129 W anyway even with MPEG-4 at 6 - 9 HD channels per TP.

In regards to E-10, do you think it will really be that hard to move locals from the wings to a spotbeam on E-10 at 110 W?
 
#51 ·
Jacob S said:
That would be great if they could put all the locals from 105 and 121 to 129 so that everyone could have a smaller dish. Its a shame that Dish Network has to have such a large dish and not as good of a solution as DirecTv on getting everyone their locals.
There isn't room at 129 for all the locals on 105 and 121. Besides, that is a lot of cost to replace the SuperDishes with other dishes.
rocatman said:
Correct me if I am wrong but I thought that the provisions in the SHVERA legislation required that all locals in a single DMA had to be able to be received by a single dish not a single location and that if one subscribed to their locals they had to have that single dish installed. If this is true than Dish could put locals from one DMA at 110 and/or 119 and 129 (if Dish gets access to that slot) and still meet the SHVERA requirements. Dish could also split locals between 105/110/119 or 110/119/121 but dish would have to install Superdishes for folks wanting locals in those markets.
The technical wording of SHVERA would allow "single dish" locals that were split between satellites - but if ONE customer subscribes to locals and doesn't have the "one" dish expect the fire and brimstone from the NAB and any broadcaster on 129.

E* pushed the limits by splitting markets between main and side slots. The NAB and Congress liked their interpretation so much that they wrote a law to block that practice. I hope E* doesn't push the envelope again. Even a customer with bad line of sight to see 129 will be a problem if E* splits locals between satellites. Complaints will abound from the "2nd class stations".

Entire markets NEED to be at the same orbital slot to avoid problems.

JL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top