1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

When is MSNBC going HD?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by SirJW, Jun 24, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jul 8, 2009 #141 of 150

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I think the term is more blinded than confused. You are blinded by the idea that I'm a DISH subscriber and therefore everything has to be about D* versus E*. If you were a lot less prejudiced towards me, you would have seen that I was simply illustrating that D* has a rather well documented track record of negotiating channels that present precious little HD content and that BET was among the worst channels they could have picked in terms of HD density. E* carried BET quite a while before D* picked it up, so I don't think I should be abused for asserting that they're somehow better in this regard.

    As DIRECTV is apparently in some sort of a crunch for bandwidth, choosing a largely SD channel probably allows them to spread their bandwidth around without being assailed for strangling true HD content. As long as the HD feed is perceived as better than the SD feed, they're thinking they're golden (and the apologists are clapping very loudly).
  2. Jul 8, 2009 #142 of 150

    syphix Hall Of Fame

    Jun 23, 2004
    When did HLN go HD?? According to this story, it's being added to Time Warner's lineup in Elmira, NY.

    Also, looks like TruTV went HD, too (big dealio):
  3. Jul 8, 2009 #143 of 150

    mystic7 Icon

    Dec 9, 2007
    I saw at least two replays that were in HD before the SD replay. Also, suddenly every time I scan past CMT-HD they seem to be showing HD content. Guess they finally took their new toy out of the box.
  4. Jul 8, 2009 #144 of 150

    RACJ2 Hall Of Fame

    Aug 2, 2008
    This appears to confirm what the article states and both HLN HD and Tru HD will be added to TWC in August. TW Cable already shows this in their legal notice in that region: "August 11, 2009 Headline News HD will be added to Channel 1050". Link:TWC adding HLN & Tru HD
  5. Jul 8, 2009 #145 of 150

    thestaton Legend

    Aug 14, 2008
    Just so they get it rolled out by the next election, so I can see all those 3d pie charts in HD.
  6. Jul 8, 2009 #146 of 150

    tds4182 Legend

    Jul 17, 2003

    OK--I'll ask my question directly.

    Harsh, do you post in the E* sites and, if so, is it more or less often than you post on the D* site?

    Are you as "harsh" on E* as you are on D*?
  7. Jul 8, 2009 #147 of 150

    Drew2k New Member

    Aug 16, 2006
    Please. :rolleyes: I made one valid and factual comment in this thread and I'm prejudiced... :rolleyes:

    Poor attempt at an illustration when your responses are "Have you seen anything in HD yet?" and "It was in SD last night." Coupled with the fact that you do not have DIRECTV, this bears little weight because your provider could easily be screwing up the feeds your seeing. DIRECTV has shown it in HD, which I "illustrated" earlier. That you couldn't find it in HD via your provider is not proof of any deficiencies on DIRECTV's part.

    You clearly have your own agenda and opinion of DIRECTV and it's subscribers, which I disagree with.

    Name calling is not appropriate at DBSTalk. It's clear you are not interested in dialog, but in name-calling, so there is no point in replying further.
  8. Jul 8, 2009 #148 of 150

    Rakul Slacker

    Sep 3, 2007

    Not to jump on this line, but would the SD content on an HD channel take up just as much bandwidth as HD conent? It's still being broadcast in 1080i or 720p regardless of the source material correct?
  9. Jul 8, 2009 #149 of 150

    LameLefty I used to be a rocket scientist

    Sep 28, 2006
    Turning away from treating each other harshly and back to the topic at hand . . . the answer to that question is complicated by the vagaries of statmuxing and MPEG4 compression. SD content, if broadcast letterboxed or pillarboxed on an HD channel, would clearly be lower-bandwidth than true 16:9 HD, since the edges of the picture would contain essentially no data. On the other hand, "Stetch-O-Vision" SD content broadcast in HD would have somewhat higher data content (even if that data is interpolated or stretched) and so would be higher-bandwidth than letterboxed or pillarboxed content, it seems to me, though both should be lower bandwidth than full-picture, full resolution truly HD content.

    Of course, Directv could choose the path of a number of satellite and cable competitors and down-rez everything and/or bit-starve HD so much it would look like watching through a dirty window . . . in that case, HD bandwidth wouldn't even be an issue. :)
  10. Jul 8, 2009 #150 of 150
    Greg Alsobrook

    Greg Alsobrook Lifetime Achiever

    Apr 1, 2007
    This thread seems to have wandered pretty far off topic, and further discussion seems more fitting in the 'More HD in Q3 2009' thread. Please continue there.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page