Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by mystic7, Apr 10, 2013.
I agree. Not all HDTV's are created equal.
What hath I wrought!?!?! A 5 page thread so far? Wow... anyway, Time Warner had G4 in HD. Never watched it after getting my fill of Morgan Webb again after 4 years. It's mostly crappy shows, plus Attack of the Show and X-Play and now that it's going metrosexual? Really? I thought hippies were more relevant than metrosexuals.
I think so too. I had a 36" Sony SD CRT that was made just for SD. Had a beautiful picture on it. Might have been a 32". Don't really remember. Just remember how much better the PQ was on that set than any of the other sets I had. Didn't have HD then.
I have a setup of five televisions; all are HD.
I considered leaving DirecTV in 2011 at a time when the company had not yet added AMC HD.
This was also before the 2012 additions of truTV HD (March); E! Entertainment Television HD (April); Turner Classic Movies HD (July); BBC America HD, beIN Sport HD, Disney Junior HD, and Nat Geo Wild HD (August); Do It Yourself Network HD (September); and the east-coast national feed of Ion Television HD. This was also before the, thus far, 2013 additions of Cooking Channel HD, Headline News HD, H2 HD, Independent Film Channel HD, Investigation Discovery HD, Lifetime Movie Network HD, and TV Land HD (January); Oprah Winfrey Network HD and, coming up, Bloomberg Television HD (April).
I was bothered by the fact that DirecTV was behind competition on basic-cable linear high-definition programming and, two years ago, researched the area rivals while having considered leaving DirecTV to get my cable-television programming from a competitor.
I did not do it, in part, because the competition had their major flaws: Comcast, with its petty pricing for equipment and its inexcusably antiquated channel mapping; Dish Network, for its unreliablity in losing key programming (including linear HD from numerous brands from ABC/Disney); and Wide Open West, my high-speed Internet provider which is, with no disrespect, a small-fry operator that doesn't have extensive, national sports programming due to its small-fry operation system. That includes NFL Network, NBA TV, NHL Network, and MLB Network. I found out, after erroneously thinking otherwise, that I could not get AT&T U-verse because my exact location couldn't pick up service. But AT&T wouldn't have me anyway because I do like Hallmark Channel and Hallmark Movie Channel, and AT&T U-verse and Crown Media parted ways after Aug. 31, 2010 over contractual disagreement.
One thing that can be said about DirecTV is it doesn't foul up, like Dish Network and AT&T U-verse, in consistently delivering core national programming. The channel mapping is convenient with DirecTV. And, despite it looking bleak for quite some time, someone finally got the ball rolling at DirecTV to play catch-up with delivering basic-cable, linear high-definition programming. It's been fun, in the quarterly threads on "HD Anticipation," to speculate on what's next. (I'm thinking The Hub HD will be coming in the third quarter.)
I will be staying with DirecTV for a good amount of additional time. Who knows what the future brings? But I've been with DirecTV for 15 years. It hasn't always been rosy. But it's been good enough. It's just a matter of keeping it going. The business, and its many challenges, are continuous. And who is in key positions matter. (One of them who left last year is not missed by me.)
I have two SD TVs still left in my house. Directv's SD is garbage on both. SD quality is related to the highly compressed, resolution cut signal being sent by Directv.
You said you are close to cutting the cord and bundling with your cable company ? I don't call that "cord cutting" That is just switching to cable and to cable's bundled packages. It might be cheaper , but it is not cord cutting . Cord cutting is just what it says . Cutting that cord to Satellite and Cable services. Cutting that cord to paid TV services . Someone correct me if I am wrong.
I don't care for the higher cost of direct tv. Nor the fact the guide data isn't always 100% accurate and recordings are sometimes missed. Having flipped between direct and dish every 2 years for the past decade or more I can say that I prefer dish.
I am thinking of cord cutting soon but it isn't so much D*'s fault as the way the industry is going in general. I don't know how much longer D*, Dish et al can do 5-10% raises every year when me and most people I know are lucky to get any kind of a raise these days, much less 5%.
I am mad at D*'s removal of the Plus HD DVR package and think their $10/month HD fee is ridiculous but Dish is my only other option and I have a much larger list of issues with them so it will be D* or nothing for me.
I couldn't disagree more. My SD DVD's look fantastic, yet DirecTV's SD looks like a 20 yr old VHS tape, all on the same $3000 TV. Can't pin DirecTV's criminal amount of compression on the TV.
As for the OP's original question, asking if anyone here doesn't like DirecTV is like going to a bar and asking if anyone doesn't like beer.
Aside from the unwatchable SD, I agree with others that DirecTV has gotten way too expensive. That, and the slow DVRs are my biggest gripes.
Fair enough. If I can reduce my cable internet cost by bundling tv with it, then I'll do that. If not, I won't. So, if it becomes necessary for me to reduce my monthly cost to the point I would drop DirecTV, it might be to limited cable, or it might be to over-the-air only tv. What I'm really paying for right now is the convenience of multiple DVRs with multi-room viewing, much more than paying for the assortment of channels I get (most of which I don't watch).
The smaller the screen , the better SD looks. I can't watch it anymore on my 73", and DTV is the worst for SD.
Having just recently switched back to Directv I can say that Time Warner's SD channels look much better than Directv. However, their HD channels are so compressed they look terrible when there's any kind of movement on screen. They could cut down on the compression by allocating less bandwidth to their SD stations, which would put them in Directv territory. But overall I'm satisfied with Directv. Wait, I started this thread, didn't I!?!?
I actually asked a friend why he had recorded something from the SD version of a channel on TWC, was surprised when he told me that was the HD version.
+1......I have a neighbor who has TWC. Last summer I was at his house and asked him why the baseball game he was watching wasn't in HD. To my surprise he said it was HD.
No I wouldn't go that far. Their HD is great, the compression just messes up when there's a lot of motion. Picture the intro to Big Bang Theory. That gets really wacked out. Also when confetti falls, or a closeup of a running back, or the crowd at a game. But the actual pq is real HD, if anything a half a hair worse than Directv, if that, so I think your friends must have their tv's set to 480p without realizing it or something.
Not in my experience. Even in something like a sitcom, at least TWC in Cincinnati on an Scientific Atlanta 8000HD looked horrid. He definitely was not on 480p.
Are you sure these people you are surprised are using HD because it looks like SD actually are using HD? I remember a couple years ago watching a college football game on ESPN at a friend's house who had Directv and a brand new 50" TV he was very proud of. I saw him tune the HD channel, but the game looked terrible. While he was in the bathroom I grabbed the remote and found the receiver was set to 480i. I fixed that, and it looked way better. He didn't even notice until I pointed it out.
I remember reading something a while back that said 1/3 of people who have HD capable equipment don't have it properly set to display in HD. Knowing how clueless most people are about technology, I wouldn't be surprised.
In my case yes. Admittedly, he had an old tube HDTV, but even before upgrading that, when he switched, he noticed a major difference in HD quality. I know he was using the HD channel because he complained about how DirecTV didn't separate them. I know his set didn't support one of the resolutions, so everything went to the one it did support.
I haven't had TWC HD, I got fed up when they kept telling me HD DVRs didn't exist and their ads saying that Internet speed was dependent on the diameter of the cable.
So as long as you're watching a still picture, you're good? That would be great if most shows had no motion.
Perhaps. But after watching DirecTV's SD channels for over 12 years I think they look just fine-even on my 42" HDTV. New flat screen TV's vary widely in their processing of SD resolutions. When I selected my Toshiba Regza HDTV I compared it with all the other TV's at the dealer USING AN SD PROGRAM. I was lucky enough to find a local dealer who would let me do this as opposed to the usual scenario where all the TV's are being fed by a blu-ray DVD at 1080p to impress customers. I was amazed at the difference!! Some of the TV's when fed the SD signal looked so blurry that they would produce a headache. Mine didn't so I bought it.
I also still have 2 SD DVR's feeding older SD CRT TV's and I have not seen a reduction in picture quality.
The problem from my perspective is that many viewers have become accustomed to watching HD and then go crazy when they tune in to an SD program or channel. I would be really curious if anyone could actually verify that DirecTV has reduced their PQ on their SD feeds....