Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by mavs-fan, Jul 13, 2012.
Some providers did switch one for the other, but several have both like Directv does.
That's what Disney wanted and other companies allowed it to be swapped out. DIRECTV chose not to take Disney Jr at the time of launch and kept the Soapnet contract which is set to expire.
Any idea when Soapnet is supposed to leave Directv?
It is not the receivers. It is firmly established that directv starves SD.
I don't mind on channels that have HD. Too bad they do it to all of them.
No relevancy. DTV's signal in SD was never as good as a DVD to begin with. An SD broadcast signal is meant to be seen on a SD television. Seeing it on a HD television is not going to do it any justice. A dvd is locally connected to your tv and depending on the connection (HDMI, etc), you could get a pretty decent picture.
If I see SD from any provider on a HD television, it just doesn't look good because it wasn't meant for that medium.
Have you ever seen SD on FiOS? FiOS does not compress their SD signal at all, so it is actually quite watchable on an HD television. Not HD quality, of course, but eons better than what DirecTV delivers.
Better, yes. Eons? Nope. I see marginal differences between Doctor Who (BBCA) and Hot in Cleveland (TVLand), for example. I see no difference on TCM. But I see a big difference on FMC. Fios's SD sports (EI, NHL, etc) reeks, but i think that is the supplier, not fios itself So it varies.
They do give more bandwidth to SD but I'm not sure their boxes handle SD well.
I have fios and directv both HDMI through the same AVR.
There are a couple SD sub channels I get OTA that run old sitcoms. They actually look very good on my HD tvs. Not sure what they are doing but It can be good.
Since I get Comcast Internet I can see their basic channels too, their SD is far superior. Their HD not as good. Price and content atrocious. I don't watch any SD channels, however when I download a show off directv on demand in SD the quality is much better than live. It is relevant as long as they are broadcasting SD channels to HD subscribers.
I have a four-year old daughter who likes Disney Jr. very much but is angry that it is in SD and is now refusing to watch it unless it is upgraded by Directv to HD. What can I do to make her happy? This started on Saturday and she keeps sulking.
Record some of the programming on the regular Disney channel in the early AM. That would be my only suggestion.
Did you make a big deal out of it not being in HD? I ask because in general young children don't really care at all. Give them lots of movement, color and sound and they are good to go.
But I would think that if you just wait a bit, you'll find that she'll either watch it in SD or find something else she likes. Sulking isn't a terminal disease you know!
First World Problems...
So are adults being "spoiled brats" for wanting the TV channels we enjoy in HD? (Don't know about you, but in MY day to day life I see a lot more obnoxious adults than five-year-olds.)
Dbstalk: come from the discussion of satellite service, stay for the awesome parenting advice.
My niece and nephew certainly don't care about whether a program is in SD or HD - I often see them watching the SD version of a channel when the HD is available.
But, that really doesn't matter, I would prefer that any new channel be in HD regardless of the target audience and whether or not it's a channel I particularly care about watching.
I've bit my tongue long enough....
I guess gone are the days where parents raised their children instead of letting TV do it for them.
I also guess gone are the days where parents took a stand and told children to be lucky with what they have instead of just giving them everything they want because they pitch a fit.
Disney Jr was given to us in SD, be lucky we have that.
No, the adults aren't spoiled brats since they are paying for the service. When was the last time your children paid the satellite bill?
+1, great point!
Also the adults aren't spoiled because most of us can survive if a channel we watch is only offered in SD.
Why does paying the bill imply more of a right to complain? As a
parent I want my kids to be just as happy as I am when
they watch their shows. I certainly don't use the TV to raise
my kids but would be quite disturbed if they couldn't tell the
difference between SD & HD. Kids, who are people too should
prefer HD content just like adults. It looks so much better. How can they not?
Is it that children shouldn't express their opinions?
Or even have them?
Should they be mindless vidiots banished to SD content only
because they aren't paying?
I've been reading this blog since 2008 and have read countless posts crying about all sorts of channels available in SD that aren't available in HD. How is this
any different? What makes BBC America, DIY, H2 or any other channel
more important than children's content? News flash, it's not. There's a really
good possibility that this children's content drives more revenue
than many of the adult channels desired by the kid-haters posting
in this thread...
Quite the hypocrisy. Parents who want the best for their kids VS Adults acting like children.
And I don't even care about this, not affected by it. I have
Brighthouse as a back up for my DirecTV in case of bad Florida weather and get all the Viacom channels, Disney Jr HD, BBCA HD etc...completely unaffected either way but would like everybody to get what they want.
I never said the kids couldn't tell the difference, but generally if you don't make a big deal out of it, they won't either. I've been around this old ball of dirt quite a few years, had 4 kids of my own and interface with my grandkids, grandneices and grandnepwhews enough to know that they really don't care about it at all.
Will they notice? Yeah. Might they say something about it? Yeah. But in the grand scheme of things, they won't really care all that much.
From some of the overcaring parents comments here, it is easy to pick out which ones are making their issue, the kids issue when it really isn't at all.