Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Be thankful that we are retaining channels, rather than losing them

reboot daily

  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#51 OFFLINE   BattleScott

BattleScott

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,353 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2006

Posted 03 August 2011 - 01:37 PM

You need me to point out why the grass is greener with DirecTV when compared to U-Verse? Yikes...


You are stating that DirecTV has a better track record with respect to dropping HD channels than UVerse and I would just like to understand what that claim is based on.
HR24-500 / AM-21 / WGA54AG
42" Pannasonic Plasma
HR22-100 / 26" LG LCD
Slimline 5-LNB

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#52 OFFLINE   Hutchinshouse

Hutchinshouse

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,632 posts
Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Posted 03 August 2011 - 02:37 PM

Yes, the pros and cons to each tech are clear now. One is clearly better than the other. Even those within the industry are calling LG out on it.

Keeping channels instead of dropping them is a good thing and something DirecTV has been very successful at.


"within the industry" = Competitors :lol:

I hope you didn't expect the competitors to congratulate the opposition. :rolleyes:

FYI - LG is not the only passive manufacturer, just the best. ;)

#53 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 6,658 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 03 August 2011 - 03:09 PM

"within the industry" = Competitors :lol:

I hope you didn't expect the competitors to congratulate the opposition. :rolleyes:

FYI - LG is not the only passive manufacturer, just the best. ;)


I was referring to this: http://gizmodo.com/5...nsult-lgs-3dtvs

I'm not sure I would label LG as the best. It would be pretty embarrassing to be the best at doing something poorly.
DTV = Digital Television

#54 OFFLINE   sigma1914

sigma1914

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,440 posts
  • LocationAllen, TX
Joined: Sep 05, 2006

Posted 03 August 2011 - 03:25 PM

I think you mean this article: http://gizmodo.com/5...nd-passive-3dtv

After a trial of active shutter TVs, LG's obviously persisting with passive 3DTV over the more superior 3D format which is what Samsung and the other manufacturers have rightly adopted, a move which caused Samsung to brand LG "stupid ****s" when referring to their 3DTVs in April.


If you stop responding to them or put them on ignore, then eventually they'll go away.

#55 OFFLINE   moob

moob

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 184 posts
Joined: Nov 19, 2008

Posted 03 August 2011 - 07:06 PM

"within the industry" = Competitors :lol:

I hope you didn't expect the competitors to congratulate the opposition. :rolleyes:

FYI - LG is not the only passive manufacturer, just the best. ;)


I was referring to this: http://gizmodo.com/5...nsult-lgs-3dtvs

I'm not sure I would label LG as the best. It would be pretty embarrassing to be the best at doing something poorly.

Eh. I'll just say this...I don't own a 3D set, and I have no plans to get one in the near future. It still seems a bit gimmicky to me and there just isn't that much content. But I've seen every variant of 3D at CES over the years. Obviously glasses-less is the worst, but that's still in its infancy. This past year, LG demoed a passive "84" Ultra Definition 3D TV" and it was by far the best/cleanest looking 3D I've ever seen, and their other passive sets looked good as well (though not as good as that one). But that's just me.

Keeping channels instead of dropping them is a good thing and something DirecTV has been very successful at.

As far as I'm concerned, for all intents and purposes, it's a matter of subtraction by omission. No, DirecTV may not have dropped that many channels, but not having them in HD is just about the same to me. I don't watch AMC or BBCA on DirecTV because they're not in HD, much like I didn't watch G4 much when they had the channel. I'm not going to watch D*'s god-awful SD, and there are many other ways to get content in HD. They could remove those SD channels today and I wouldn't care.

#56 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 03 August 2011 - 10:27 PM

What is permanent?

The provider will usually mention why they're dropping the channel. If it's a contract issue that is ongoing, they'll say that, and everyone expects it to eventually be worked out. In the cases of ESPN3D and G4, the reasoning was low demand. Totally different.

#57 OFFLINE   Satelliteracer

Satelliteracer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,042 posts
Joined: Dec 06, 2006

Posted 03 August 2011 - 11:31 PM

The provider will usually mention why they're dropping the channel. If it's a contract issue that is ongoing, they'll say that, and everyone expects it to eventually be worked out. In the cases of ESPN3D and G4, the reasoning was low demand. Totally different.


The issue with ESPN3D was ultimately cost.
DIRECTV employee

All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#58 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 03 August 2011 - 11:59 PM

The issue with ESPN3D was ultimately cost.

Right, since DirecTV is pushing 3D harder than any other provider, we can't say anything that might indicate there isn't a huge demand for 3D.

#59 OFFLINE   am7crew

am7crew

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 267 posts
Joined: Jun 05, 2009

Posted 04 August 2011 - 12:30 AM

U-Verse does have free Starz HD 3d on demand. Cant find that on my directv hmmmmmmmmmmmm

#60 OFFLINE   BattleScott

BattleScott

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,353 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 05:57 AM

What is permanent? Who is to say G4 doesn't come back on D* in the next year. U-Verse has dropped Food Network, Cooking Channel, HGTV, Hallmark Channel, Hallmark Movie Channel, DIY, etc in the last 24 months....they added them back. Channels come and go and there's nothing to suggest when some of the same channels cycle off their contract on AT&T that D* let go won't happen with others as well.


How does that make the grass "Greener" at DirecTV? That sounds like "they have the same shade of grass". To make a statement that one is better than the other in a very specific area, I think there should just be some data to back it up.
HR24-500 / AM-21 / WGA54AG
42" Pannasonic Plasma
HR22-100 / 26" LG LCD
Slimline 5-LNB

#61 OFFLINE   Hutchinshouse

Hutchinshouse

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,632 posts
Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 08:51 AM

The issue with ESPN3D was ultimately cost.


Right, since DirecTV is pushing 3D harder than any other provider, we can't say anything that might indicate there isn't a huge demand for 3D.


I agree that it all comes down to demand. If AT&T was making fat bank on ESPN 3D, they'd still have it.

#62 OFFLINE   Stuart Sweet

Stuart Sweet

    The Shadow Knows!

  • Registered
  • 37,060 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:26 AM

As for DIRECTV pushing 3D, I'm sure they have solid marketing data. I'll admit that 3D doesn't interest me a whole lot but there has to be a good reason.
Opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily reflect
those of DBSTalk.com, DIRECTV, DISH, The Signal Group, or any other company.

#63 OFFLINE   lparsons21

lparsons21

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 3,719 posts
  • LocationHerrin, IL
Joined: Mar 04, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:34 AM

As for DIRECTV pushing 3D, I'm sure they have solid marketing data. I'll admit that 3D doesn't interest me a whole lot but there has to be a good reason.


I don't know that they have solid data other than thinking the home entertainment mfgs are pushing the heck out of 3D and investing lots of money to try to ensure that it succeeds this time after all the previous failures.

I'm with you on not being all that interested, especially for anything in the home that requires glasses of any sort. And then there's the problem that 3D really doesn't add anything compelling to all too much of the movies or scripted tv shows.

But what are they to do? What else can they do to a TV to make us want to buy that next best thing?

Lloyd
Receiver/Provider: Hopper w/Sling/Dish Network
HDTV : Mitsi WD-73742 73" 3D DLP
Surround: Harman Kardon 3700, 7.1 Setup

 


#64 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 6,658 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:37 AM

Good lord. Seriously? Are we listening to this nonsense? The facts are that Satelliteracer DOES know what he is talking about and Jeremy DOES NOT. If Sat says it is about cost, end of discussion, it is about cost.
DTV = Digital Television

#65 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:42 AM

As for DIRECTV pushing 3D, I'm sure they have solid marketing data. I'll admit that 3D doesn't interest me a whole lot but there has to be a good reason.

Honestly, I think it was mostly a gamble on DirecTV's part. Even though they are the clear 3D leader, they don't have that much invested in it. Even their exclusive n3D channel is partially paid for by Panasonic.

#66 OFFLINE   Hutchinshouse

Hutchinshouse

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,632 posts
Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:45 AM

Good lord. Seriously? Are we listening to this nonsense? The facts are that Satelliteracer DOES know what he is talking about and Jeremy DOES NOT. If Sat says it is about cost, end of discussion, it is about cost.


Dude, it all comes down to demand. The cost for ST is very high. However, DIRECTV is making fat bank with ST. If AT&T had high demand for ESPN 3D, they’d still have it. Simply as that. Demand trumps costs. ST is the perfect example.

#67 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:47 AM

If Sat says it is about cost, end of discussion, it is about cost.

So now a DirecTV employee is the final authority on U-verse as well? [redacted]

Edited by Tom Robertson, 04 August 2011 - 10:08 AM.


#68 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,828 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:56 AM

You are stating that DirecTV has a better track record with respect to dropping HD channels than UVerse and I would just like to understand what that claim is based on.


Since U-Verse has only been operating for 3 years, any comparison with years prior to 2007 would not really be fair. As far as I recall, (but I could be wrong), DirecTV has dropped 1 station since then, which is G4. They also had several retransmission agreement negotiations that cause e.g. Versus to be not available for 6 months (just like HGTV and Food Network were dropped from U-verse for almost a month because of negotiations). With the dropping of ESPN 3D, the count for dropped channels is 1 versus 1 since 2007.

As far as "number of stations carried", U-verse might beat DirecTV.... if you don't count NFL, NHL, MLS, NASCAR and NBA. And 2011 is the first year they actually carried MLB Extra Innings.

U-Verse has much, much worse issues how ever: The picture quality is absolutely horrible, you can only have 3 HD streams (and 1 SD) to your house, which means if you are recording 2 HD shows in the living room, only ONE other TV in your house can actually watch HD. And if you also have U-verse internet..... your available bandwidth for internet applications will go down when you watch HD stations. Yeah that sort of depends on what Internet you have, but if you have 24/3 internet like me, you would only be able to watch (or record) ONE SINGLE HD station (on the maximum 32/5 profile) before it starts eating away on your internet bandwidth.

Plus, their packaging system is a straight ripoff. I have been an HBO fan since the Sex and the City days when I first subscribed to it, and I also am a big baseball fan. If I want the MLB Network, I must buy U300 (and thus pay for Showtime, but not getting HBO), and if I want to add HBO to that.... it is extra, I can't replace Showtime with HBO. Sure, I can get U450, which by the way is also the only way of getting NHL network, my second big sports, but then I pay for Starz, Cinemax I don't necesarily want. Getting MLB Network AND HBO, would have cost me about $20 more with U-verse then with DirecTV, and the difference in other channels is just not worth that much more a month.

As far as technology goes....the system they use was already outdated when they started implementing it in 2007. But their investors were/are happy, as they didn't have to invest in fiber.

I much rather watch 100 HD stations in perfectly clear quality on all TV's in the house, then have a 120 HD stations and be limited to sub-par quality, and be limited to how many TV's I can actually watch those HD stations on.

No thanks. I have U-Verse voice (2 lines), U-Verse Internet..... and DirecTV. Best combo I have had so far with Internet and Television services. U-Verse television with amateurHD is not entering my house.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#69 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:59 AM

U-Verse has much, much worse issues how ever: The picture quality is absolutely horrible

All of your other knocks against U-verse are fair, but this one is not. Their HD picture quality is not at DirecTV's level, but to call it "absolutely horrible" is totally inaccurate. It's perfectly watchable.

#70 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,828 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 04 August 2011 - 09:59 AM

As for DIRECTV pushing 3D, I'm sure they have solid marketing data.


They don't charge $10 extra for it, DirecTV just rolls 3D access into the HD access, which you can get for free with autobillpay, or is $10 if you don't like autobillpay.

Charging $10 a month extra for 1 station was their biggest mistake. I am willing to bet most 3DTV owners that also had U-Verse don't subscribe to it, where as with DirecTV 3D gets way more visability because it is "free" if you have HD.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#71 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 10:01 AM

Charging $10 a month extra for 1 station was their biggest mistake.

I bet they knew exactly what they were doing. It was more of a "what the hell, let's throw it out there and see what happens" than an actual legitimate belief that they'd have people paying the "3D Technology Fee" in droves. AT&T obviously doesn't believe in 3D, and didn't want to make any real commitment to it.

#72 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,770 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 04 August 2011 - 10:04 AM

The issue with ESPN3D was ultimately cost.


Right, since DirecTV is pushing 3D harder than any other provider, we can't say anything that might indicate there isn't a huge demand for 3D.


The two statements are not mutually exclusive. Ultimately it is the cost vs. value. More watchers, more value.

And there is opportunity cost. Uverse might have decided their equipment costs can be better utilized on a channel with higher margin (which doesn't necessarily mean more viewers, just more money.) :)

Or ESPN might have promised certain viewership for the cost they charged.

Cheers,
Tom

Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)


#73 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,828 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 04 August 2011 - 10:15 AM

All of your other knocks against U-verse are fair, but this one is not. Their HD picture quality is not at DirecTV's level, but to call it "absolutely horrible" is totally inaccurate. It's perfectly watchable.


When I bought my house in October 2010, the previous owner had U-Verse.... and I watched it on his TV. He also had an DirecTV dish on his roof, and he had actually just switched to U-Verse 3 months prior to selling......and then he got hit with a divorce, and needed to sell. I saw the picture quality on his TV (a samsung HD tv, slightly different model then mine), and it was worse then Time Warner Cable, which is what I had at the time. DirecTV's quality is much better then TWC.

Granted, there was a baseball game on when I watched it.... and sports with lots of movement and camera-action might simply proved to be too much for the 5.7 Mbps U-verse calls HD, as the pixellation was horrible. And that is why I call it horrible.

I am not alone with my opinion. When buying the house, I did a lot of asking around, and I had narrowed down my choices to U-Verse and DirecTV, because both of those offered whole home DVR, which Dish did not.... and I wanted to get rid of TWC. Both my realtor and the selling realtor tried U-Verse, and dumped it within a month. One went to DirecTV, the other went back to TWC where he came from. Both cited picture quality as the biggest problem with it. And after I saw it myself watching baseball on U-verse, the decision was pretty easy to make: DirecTV.

AT&T should have gone fiber from the get-go like Verizon FIOS.
[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#74 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 10:43 AM

AT&T should have gone fiber from the get-go like Verizon FIOS.

Can't disagree there. But on the flip side, Verizon should have gone with an IPTV architecture like AT&T did. With the entire fiber dedicated to IP, instead of their current ridiculous RF-over-fiber setup for TV, they'd have an unmatched network.

#75 OFFLINE   BattleScott

BattleScott

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,353 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2006

Posted 04 August 2011 - 10:44 AM

With the dropping of ESPN 3D, the count for dropped channels is 1 versus 1 since 2007.


Thanks for the data, that proves the intial statement was false and that the grass is simply the same shade in both places.

The rest of the post was irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
HR24-500 / AM-21 / WGA54AG
42" Pannasonic Plasma
HR22-100 / 26" LG LCD
Slimline 5-LNB




Protected By... spam firewall...And...