How many of you think Directv should start compressing their hd more so we can get more channels?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by mkdtv21, Apr 25, 2014.

Should Directv start to compress their hd a little more?

  1. Picture quality is more important to me than channel choice.

    234 vote(s)
    96.3%
  2. The availability of channels is more important to me with the sacrifice of picture quality.

    9 vote(s)
    3.7%
  1. dennisj00

    dennisj00 Hall Of Fame

    9,690
    196
    Sep 27, 2007
    Lake Norman, NC
    It could happen quickly if DirecTV could keep a copy of every program in their cloud (or a central cloud everyone subscribes to) but I think I remember there's some patent or contract clause that prevents the 1 to many storage. You could have just an index for your selections that you watch on Demand.

    Or with the proper package, On Demand for every program.
     
  2. tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    By live tv, do you mean sports and news and chat shows? Or do you mean as broadcast with commercials?
     
  3. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,600
    95
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    News and broadcast and with commercials. I don't like sports.
     
  4. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,541
    617
    Dec 2, 2010
    Monterey...
    It could happen today for those with sufficient bandwidth, but will never be universally a solution. --Unless you believe every hamlet, every barnyard will be on the information superhighway.
     
  5. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,600
    95
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    What about with 1 Gbps internet starting to be deployed? Also what if we didn't need the cloud and instead just expanded on VOD? Or is VOD considered the cloud also?
     
  6. peds48

    peds48 Genius.

    20,073
    1,072
    Jan 10, 2008
    NY
    While 1Gbps internet is being deployed in some places, is naive to believe that it will be deployed every where anytime soon. "the cloud" means the internet so VOD may be considered as video in the cloud as well
     
  7. dennisj00

    dennisj00 Hall Of Fame

    9,690
    196
    Sep 27, 2007
    Lake Norman, NC
    Everything is considered the Cloud!
     
  8. peds48

    peds48 Genius.

    20,073
    1,072
    Jan 10, 2008
    NY
    Although the cloud term was made more for storage purposes, where you have the rights to edit the contents. like Google Drive, Dropbox, etc...
     
  9. CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,600
    95
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    Isn't that how TV providers are looking at the cloud? Instead of having a home HD storage its stored at the TV providers severs? Wouldn't that reduce costs deploying equipment to a customers home? A customer could use their own equipment or a TV provider would just come out with a small HD Receiver connected to the cloud?
     
  10. peds48

    peds48 Genius.

    20,073
    1,072
    Jan 10, 2008
    NY
    Right, but as is has been discussed before, this is something DirecTV can't rely on, as least as of now


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  11. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    49,418
    1,760
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The cloud is undefined. Go back a few years before the term was commonly used and look at network diagrams. Diagrams that show computers connected to routers possibly through firewalls to other computers with lines showing the data path. When there is a part that is undefined (such as the public Internet or the public switched telephone system) a cloud is drawn. It is the easy way of omitting detail while acknowledging that something is there.

    Cloud computing and cloud storage are something there but the details are less important than knowing that something is there providing the computing and/or storage. One could diagram the details of a cloud storage server farm, but the detail of the cloud is less important than the presence of the cloud.

    Content from the cloud can be things an individual uploads for themselves or others or public services such as Amazon or iTunes. For public services one purchases the rights to access the content either individually or in bulk and the stored content is delivered to the home or portable device on demand. For private services one either uploads their own media or purchases a copy that is placed in their private storage. The cloud makes it easy to access the same content from multiple devices.

    Regardless of the source of the material or storage location, getting content from the cloud is a one to one connection. The content delivery networks that deliver personal or public services must be robust enough to handle the individual demand from all viewers lest there be problems receiving the content. If two million people want to watch NASCAR on a weekend at the same time there needs to be two million streams (especially if server based trick plays are allowed). Or the race can be broadcast via satellite on a cable channel or to television affiliates and then distributed by broadcast reaching two million or two hundred million with no degradation.

    The degradation on a broadcast signal such as satellite would come from competition ... not the millions of other people who want to watch the same content at the same time (with trick plays handled at the receiver) but the millions of other people who want to watch something else. The 20 million DirecTV subscribers that even if they love NASCAR want more in their subscription than one channel playing NASCAR. They want many or most of the ~200 channels DirecTV carries in HD - and probably want one or two channels that are not yet in HD.

    That is where the cloud wins ... it doesn't matter to the data network if you are watching a stream of the most popular program or the most esoteric niche program. Your stream is your stream. But a hundred million homes all wanting their own stream - with multiple streams per home being requested and the cloud isn't so light and fluffy any more. It gets weighed down. Broadcast (one to many over the same bandwidth) works better when there are a lot of viewers wanting the same content.
     
  12. Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,541
    617
    Dec 2, 2010
    Monterey...
    In addition to James' fine exposition, just because you (the generic "you") can get 30 or more down, doesn't mean everyone can. So, technology exists right now that'd make IP delivery of content to those people- at least some of those people, as we don't know how the two million folks in James' example watching NASCAR at the same time will scale at the server end.

    And some will never be able to avail themselves of internet delivery. ( I prefer to not use cloud as a term for this.)
     
    2 people like this.
  13. May 1, 2014 #133 of 161
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    10,506
    1,483
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    It only makes sense to do when the TV provider is also the internet provider. Then the "cloud DVR" isn't going across the internet, but only across the provider's network. Once you're using someone else's network you have no knowledge/control over where the choke points are.

    If they offer a competing service, they even have an incentive to not do anything to improve matters if there are problems. Can you imagine if a lot of people subscribed to Comcast for internet and Directv for TV, and Directv is streaming a lot of programming across Comcast's network, that Comcast is going to go out of their way to insure it streams well? Given the way the "net neutrality" thing is turning, they may throttle Directv traffic, hoping to get those customers to dump them for Comcast TV service.
     
  14. May 1, 2014 #134 of 161
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,541
    617
    Dec 2, 2010
    Monterey...
    Now, now! Comcast would never resort to such tactics!!

    :bang !rolling
     
  15. May 1, 2014 #135 of 161
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    34,183
    1,518
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I had hopes. Kinda surprised me, too. But that's just us, not the great majority of subs.

    Rich
     
  16. May 1, 2014 #136 of 161
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    34,183
    1,518
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I just couldn't get that smilie to work on that one post. Still don't know why. :rolling: And, yet again, it works!

    Rich
     
  17. May 1, 2014 #137 of 161
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    34,183
    1,518
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    Yet another term to baffle the masses with BS.

    Rich
     
  18. May 1, 2014 #138 of 161
  19. May 1, 2014 #139 of 161
    damondlt

    damondlt New Member

    5,455
    233
    Feb 27, 2006
    Newfoundland...
    I can get up to 50 MBPS , but even still it doesn't mean I want to pay for such .

    15 MBPS already cost me $60 per month.

    Sent from my Galaxy S5
     
  20. May 1, 2014 #140 of 161
    VLaslow

    VLaslow Active Member

    1,288
    8
    Aug 16, 2006
    Not even worth a vote. More channels = more cost = higher billing = upset customer (me).
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page

spam firewall