Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Mike Bertelson, Jun 29, 2012.
It's all dependent upon market though... and how much bandwidth the local stations allow it.
The only channels I watch that are not already in HD are Universal Sports, DIY, Cooking, H2, WE, and Military. There is one 30 minute show I watch on RFD, but I am not sure that HD will help it. I think the source video is somewhat suspect, anyway, so I have no problem with that one staying in SD for years to come. That is another of those shows where listening is more important than viewing.
I recall one time a few years ago that there were a group of channels in test that Sixto pointed out, one of which was IFC-HD. Can't remember exactly when this was but I know this channel was definitely one of them & it's never materialized. I think it might have been around the time D12 went live but I could be wrong.
The feeds to DirecTV may also be different then the bandwidth allocated to it as a sub-station OTA.
I agree. Unlike most MeTV affiliates, it is not a subchannel. I haven't checked, but wonder if it may be MPEG4 on Directv. Much of the advertising is aimed at Canadian viewers.
I wasn't thinking about how some MeTV affiliates aren't sub-channels when I posted that...
However, it's come to my attention lately that there may be fewer instances where DirecTV gets a higher quality signal than OTA than what I had previously thought... so the odds of them having a better feed is probably slim.
Still... I stand by my statement... MeTV's PQ is dependent upon one's local affiliate.
Speaking of H2, I'd really like Military History. It's not available in HD, but DirecTV doesn't even have it in SD.
Well, Tony didn't explain what these "priorities" he assumed D* to have were, and why C-SPAN would be far down the list based on that.
I agree with Carl --if you *want* to watch that channel, you want to watch it in HD if HD is available. Full stop.
I provided the Wiki entry on CSPAN viewership above. Looks pretty solid to me (39M viewers per week). No, it isn't Nielsen numbers and metrics (because CSPAN doesn't use Nielsen), so we can't make direct comparisons, but at first glance it is not obvious to me that CSPAN viewership is far lower than other cable channels we've gotten in HD recently. So that doesn't qualify as a "CSPAN fails on that priority".
Infrastructure cost should be the same as any other channel. So it can't be that.
I haven't heard that CSPAN charges more for the HD version.
So what exactly are these "priorities" that are supposed to be D*'s priorities, and not the personal "I don't have any interest in watching it, so would prefer the bandwidth to go elsewhere" priorities of individual posters?
The only obvious downcheck that occurs to me, from a "D*'s priorities" perspective, is that CSPAN doesn't do commercials of any kind, which would include D*'s own commercial slots that they can either sell to others or use for their own ads, on most other channels.
Also, let's keep apples-to-apples here. I don't think most posters are trying to pit CSPAN against sports. Maybe a few would be willing to, but most recognize that D*'s sports priorities are very important to them. We're talking about CSPAN vs H2 or HLN or OWN or COOKING or something of that nature.
The priorities are based on bandwidth and other costs as well as costs of channels. They cannot put everything up in HD so they will put things up that HD matters to.
CSPAN is pretty much the set of channels that benefits the LEAST from HD.
Why is that hard to understand?
Although I agree with this mostly (it is just a bunch of talking heads), this is nothing more than an OPINION, not a FACT.
I can see for instance that if you are a politics addict, the next few months will make C-SPAN a widely viewed network.
It's also a cheap "we have the most HD" addition. Get the C-SPANS in HD and you can up the count.
And it is BASIC HD!
I've been posting here for nearly two years. And my position on this topic of "HD Anticipation" is the same as it was in 2010: I want every channel, currently carried in the lineup only in SD, to be made available by DirecTV in HD.
I did present a "priorities" list back in early-April 2012. And I will say that I figure C-Span HD and C-Span 2 HD would be on the low end. Now that's not talking about my personal tastes. And that was more an exercise, and not so much any belief regarding such selecting strategy from DirecTV.
Let's not forget how long it was that other providers had already been carrying AMC HD, E! Entertainment Television HD, truTV HD, and Turner Classic Movies HD before they finally were added by DirecTV. Let's not forget that while AMC was breaking ground with original programming, circa 2007 (which marked debuts of Emmy-winning Mad Men and Breaking Bad), DirecTV was immediately on board with Fuel TV HD. And let's also consider Shorts HD. Not exactly the one which seemed like a big-time, must-add on anyone's list. Anyone here at DBSTalk.com. Anyone anywhere outside of DBSTalk.com.
I don't believe priorities are the main motivation in what gets added in HD by DirecTV. The closest to that is with specific programmers that DirecTV, based on its operations, determines it cannot refrain from having in its programming lineup. And that's why I anticipate that brand-new regional sports channels are on their way — especially Time Warner Cable SportsNet HD and Time Warner Cable Deportes HD.
If priorities were motivating DirecTV on which programming must get added in HD, these quarterly "HD Anticipation" threads would not have aged as they have — along with the numerous "airing of grievances" and the emoticon use of "beating a dead horse."
The basic-cable additions of AMC HD (last September), truTV HD (last March), E! Entertainment Television HD (last April), Turner Classic Movies HD (last July) and, earlier this month, BBC America HD, Disney Junior HD, and Nat Geo Wild HD have, perhaps, given us some … encouragement.
"HD matters" to anyone who wants to watch the content, and D* is in the business of making customers happy not making value judgements for them about whether they "ought" to care. I quit watching CNN for a year and watched FNC instead because at the time the latter was in HD on my provider and the other wasn't.
It is not cheap. Bandwidth is the most precious commodity directv has. How many times before that sinks in? If they don't want to give it up for sports (their bread and butter) what makes you think they will throw it at CSPAN?
When they cannot make every channel HD, they have to choose. That is reality. But someone who chooses to stop watching news to watching self-proclaimed propaganda because it is in HD values HD higher than most, I guess.
YMMV, but I call that a damn fine year.
If the next twelve months are as good or better, I will be pleased.
I'm also not seeing any reason, right now, other than to think they've got at least another 20 HD bandwidth slots in their pocket with the new encoder tech. Still not unlimited, but a much brighter picture than we thought we were looking at six months ago.
I'm not saying this biased in the least, because there are a lot of channels that I don't care anything for that I'm lumping far higher up on the totem pole... but, well, I'm saying the following.
From a personal perspective, I'd rather have seen DirecTV add C-SPAN and C-SPAN2 over E! and TruTV. However, I agree with the statement above.
My personal beliefs obviously have nothing to do with DirecTV's decisions, so it's possible those channels could go up in testing next week... all I'm saying is that I don't see it happening.
That's just it. I'm not talking about personal preference of programming. I'm talking about what types of programs and which channels HD makes the most difference to.
Obviously, if all you watch is CSPAN 100%, that is your personal wish but shouldn't anticipation be a bit more realistic? If not, then it is not anticipation, it is just fantasy.
I am not attacking personal viewing preferences. Just trying to inject realism.
Sorry if that burst some balloons.
I missed nothing, I just said that for all I care about football (nothing), radio is just fine by me. YMMV.
A political convention has a lot more going on than "talking heads", as do other C-SPAN content. Sure SOME of it isn't helped much, but I could say the same thing about all the sportstalk and pre-game shows that are in HD.
Why do you care anyway? If you are right, the bandwidth increase is miniscule (and given MPEG4 probably uses less bandwidth than MPEG2 SD), so why can't I be happy too?
It actually IS in HD elsewhere. All 3.
To me, it's all about ratings, subscriber desire, and contract specifics. If people want it, and the $ and contract t's and c's can be agreed to, it is a higher priority.