# Anybody here dissatisfied with Directv?



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

What I mean is, when I was here before everyone talked up Directv like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Now, it seems like it's just one of many choices you could have made for tv service.

Has anything changed as far as customer service, underhanded dealings by directv (such as free NFL Ticket that ends up costing you as an example), or anything else? I just want to make sure I made the right choice going back while I still have time to cancel.

So, for the most part is everything hunky dory in the world of Directv? If you could drop the service, would you?


----------



## PK6301 (May 16, 2012)

I have been a Direct customer for 1 1/2 years, not a long time, but Time Warner Cable sucks in my neck of the woods, and Dish pissed me off while I was a customer (they could not keep a signal to save their life.)

Direct is far and wide a better option in my opinion..


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

They are still my preferred provider, largely because their equipment is head and shoulders above cable.

There was a time, many years ago, when they had: by far best price, by far the best picture, best programming and best equipment. They were head and shoulders above the local cable co. 

They no longer have the best price (cable is cheaper by about $25 last I checked); still have a slightly better picture (except SD which is awful); have slightly better programming (channel selection is about equal except the HBOs and ST) and still have the best equipment.

IMO, they are still ahead but the margin is much tighter. I'd still recommend them for those who enjoy more tech, but less so for someone who just wants to watch TV.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

OK. What I'm really looking for is if they have become less than honorable in their dealings with customers (see aformentioned NFL ticket example). I'm just trying to figure out if I can expect unexpected jumps in monthly bills because they "forgot" that a certain feature is supposed to be free for 12 months, and how difficult it is to rectify such a situation. That kind of thing.


----------



## omartinjordan (Mar 25, 2013)

I think the customer service is pretty good. I think most people are just tired of the high prices for tv in general. New equipment is sometimes hard to get but can be done if you want a new contract.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

DirecTV is like every TV provider ... It's great for some and not for others.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

mystic7 said:


> before everyone talked up Directv like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread.


and still is&#8230;.:lol:

No seriously, DirecTV has the best "package" all around


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Been with DirecTV since 2008 and would not think about going anywhere else.


----------



## Jimmy 440 (Nov 17, 2007)

I absolutely love D.I have been a loyal customer since May of 1999.I got it for the sports packages,MLB NHL & NFL & the RSN's they have from out outside the NY/NJ area.I would never go back to Comcast after having D.But unfortunatly I will be moving in the next 2-3 months & satellite tv is NOT an option (no LOS).So I am forced to go over to Verizon Fios which is a step or two above Cablevision.Really my only neg on D are the constantly rising prices.When I move into my house or condi in 2014,I will be with D again !


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

My signature says it all.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I personally would never consider anyone else. Any deals I've gotten, including one year of free Sunday Ticket I got no surprises. I didn't even have to cancel an autorenewal to not get it the next year.

I however do not have any real knowledge of their tech support, only used them two or three times. For most things, this site is better anyway unless you need a tech, change on account or a box shipped.


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

I've been a sub since 2002. Its much better then cable, but at this point, I think the dollar value is not there. ~80 to 90 / month for a basic sub w/ HD and DVR? When I started, the same sub was $40 / month. I've added HD, but getting that for free now. Also added the DVR. That was free when I started. Also think the PQ is not as good as it should be.


----------



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

I've been with Dish since 2009 and just had DirecTV installed. The ONLY thing that I prefer Dish over DirecTV is the superstations...that's all. Directv has better equipment, better package options (could only receive the good stations on Dish by getting THE HIGHEST priced package), better incentives, etc.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

sliderbob said:


> I've been with Dish since 2009 and just had DirecTV installed. The ONLY thing that I prefer Dish over DirecTV is the superstations...that's all. Directv has better equipment, better package options (could only receive the good stations on Dish by getting THE HIGHEST priced package), better incentives, etc.


You really want those out of market CW stations that bad?


----------



## paulh (Mar 17, 2003)

I'm a Primestar conversion since '98. I used to be a big D* fan. After enough programming price increases and the perpetually slow response of my HR-23, I'm now meh on D*.

Retention gave me just enough in discounts to keep me jumping to a Hopper this year, but it was really close.


----------



## sliderbob (Aug 10, 2007)

joshjr said:


> You really want those out of market CW stations that bad?


I just said the ONLY advantage on Dish was the superstations. DirecTV is the winner


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

sliderbob said:


> I just said the ONLY advantage on Dish was the superstations. DirecTV is the winner


I heard ya. I just dont think those SuperStations are worth anything. I guess one of them has some Yankee's games on it but since I am a Red Sox fan I guess I overlook that.


----------



## directv newb (Jun 25, 2012)

I think Directv customer service has been very good, of course every one can run into a bad situation here and there, but on the whole I have been very happy. The genie dvr is the greatest thing in the world to me, I was visiting my son the other day and he has some cable company, and I almost laughed out loud at his dvr capabilities and the look of the guide was ignorant. I absolutely love the guide, the genie, and the picture quality.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

I am not considering leaving. I am satisfied with the price, the picture and the equipment.

The HD DVRs are slower than the old DirecTiVO, I'll grant you that but I've been with DirecTV for so long it's just the way things are in my mind and it doesn't bother me.

I have priced other providers including FiOS and Dish. I'd never seriously consider Dish because of service and business management approaches that I don't care for. FiOS makes some pretty tempting offers on paper because I already get my phone and internet over FiOS so adding TV to a triple play bundle is pretty economical...at least at first blush.

The thing I have found with every other provider I have priced out is that getting the same type of equipment I currently enjoy with DirecTV will cost me a bundle elsewhere.

I have 5 HD DVRs (well, one is an R22 with HD but I count it as an HD DVR as far as what it provides to me) and two old DirecTiVOs. I pay a single $10 advanced receiver fee for all of those DVRs and a single $10 advanced receiver fee for HD programming access and that covers all the equipment on my account. If I added more DVRs that would still not go up. $20 covers it for my entire account.

Other providers I have priced charge for each box. There is an additional charge for each DVR and each HD DVR. It adds up quickly so even if the base package is less by the time you add the equipment charges it ends up costing me more to have a comparable setup with another provider. With cable and Dish it isn't even close. My bill would be astronomically higher even with the promotional introductory rates. 

FiOS is close for the first 12 months during the introductory pricing but once it escalates to regular price FiOS also costs significantly more for comparable package and equipment.

So not only am I happy with the programming, the picture and the technology/equipment. It is also the most economical option for me.

That is my situation. Circumstances will differ for others with different equipment needs and program package preferences so my advice to everyone making a decision on a provider is to do your homework and price it out with every option. Another provider will be the better choice for some people. It is not for me.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

I have been installing my own Directv since 1995. Had to install my first setup that I got at Radio Shack. I have moved and reinstalled my equipment and I have upgraded through having to get a different dish for my locals then another dish for HD. I still use an AT-9 minus the side LNBs which are no longer needed. It has been a fun ride doing it all myself. I would never change.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

I've been satisfied so far with Directv for the programming, and even though I'm not to fond about price increases annually at least it's better than Comcast equipment-wise, Plus the HR24 has been stable and fast responding since I had them 2 years ago, Customer service has to be the best IMO since they gave me free upgrades,credits and discounts, I cant say the same thing for Comcast, even though I have HSI from comcast they are hesitant in giving me any promotion for Internet unless I bundle with cable as I have their phone service also.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

I think you'll get horror stories from any company but a large portion of that is from customers who don't understand or care to read their agreement. D* is pretty good about giving you what they tell you and you'll be able to see any kind of special offers on your bill.


----------



## glick1 (Mar 26, 2013)

Sound drop outs to my AVR while using DD are getting old. I will be leaving soon.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I really haven't had that issue in a while. It was pretty annoying when I had my Onkyo (it clicked when the drops happened), when I got one with HDMI, I went Denon and seemed to mostly have issues with Ice Road Truckers. I got bored with that series, and haven't had an issue.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

OK, yeah this is more the type of comments I remember from back then, so basically there are no surprises to expect. Thanks everybody.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mystic7 said:


> OK, yeah this is more the type of comments I remember from back then, so basically there are no surprises to expect. Thanks everybody.


Just business as usual, but it's better than using VCRs... :lol:

Rich


----------



## duffytoo (Mar 13, 2005)

If you are a sports fan, there is nothing to compete with Direct TV. I'm not happy with the cost but the options are just as expensive.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

Here in DFW the only service I would seriously consider as an alternative is FIOS. Internet is excellent, PQ is very good. Cable is still pretty poor here, PQ and equipment. Don't like Dish business practices. Could save $30 month by going to cable, at least for the first year, but it's not worth all the hassle. 
But all the providers are getting too expensive. The ever-increasing cost of sports programming, and retransmission fees for the networks, are going to kill a lot of the business. Wonder who will be the first to cut the link with mandatory sports programming?


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

I stopped recommending DirecTV to others some 5 years ago or so (hard to remember), but continued using them myself. In fact, I have had no other provider this century. However, things are slowly changing for me. DirecTV is no longer "premium" over the competition. Slightly better, but no longer "much" better. Combine this with the fact that programming, far more important than the provider, has gone to pot over the last 10-20 years (from my perspective), so I am increasingly questioning spending large sums of money to be subject to garbage.


----------



## narrod (Jul 26, 2007)

mystic7 said:


> What I mean is, when I was here before everyone talked up Directv like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Now, it seems like it's just one of many choices you could have made for tv service.
> 
> Has anything changed as far as customer service, underhanded dealings by directv (such as free NFL Ticket that ends up costing you as an example), or anything else? I just want to make sure I made the right choice going back while I still have time to cancel.
> 
> So, for the most part is everything hunky dory in the world of Directv? If you could drop the service, would you?


I've been with them for 13 years. There's a lot not to like including spiraling costs, slow DVRs and indifferent customer service. I'm not aware of a provider that doesn't suffer from the same deficiencies.


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

*Anybody here dissatisfied with Directv?*

I have been a DirecTV subscriber for 16 years, so "dissatisfied" does not apply.

On the other hand, I am a *LOT LESS SATISFIED* than I was 5-10 years ago. The continuing price increases that far exceed inflation, the continuing decline in customer focus and service, the endless parade of firmware "upgrades" that don't correct existing problems and often introduce new problems and the frustratingly SLOOOOOW DirecTV DVR's don't provide much to get excited about.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> Here in DFW the only service I would seriously consider as an alternative is FIOS. Internet is excellent, PQ is very good. Cable is still pretty poor here, PQ and equipment. Don't like Dish business practices. Could save $30 month by going to cable, at least for the first year, but it's not worth all the hassle.
> But all the providers are getting too expensive. The ever-increasing cost of sports programming, and retransmission fees for the networks, are going to kill a lot of the business. Wonder who will be the first to cut the link with mandatory sports programming?


I always forget you're in Allen, too. Are you lucky enough to get Fios where you are? I've always wanted them at least for internet and TV, but it's like they refuse to build here. I'm between High Meadow & Exchange in the Reed Elementary area.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

My only options are DirecTV, Dish, and Time Warner Cable. I dropped TWC in favor of DirecTV in 1998 and have never looked back. I have only had to call customer service about five times in the past 15 years, and I have never had any problems with them.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

I am very satisfied with the service and technology. I am reasonably unsatisfied with the cost. Over the past decade, almost every year when prices have gone up I have cut my service by either dropping receivers or lowering my service level. Despite that, I am still paying over $100 a month which for me is simply too much money for the amount of TV I watch.

I'm probably very close (maybe next year's price increase) to cutting the cord and bundling with my cable company (where I get internet service) for a substantial reduction in monthly cost. DirecTV is simply pricing itself out of my reach. My last reduction in service package has reached the point of dropping some channels I did not want to drop (including Root sports), a direct result/impact of the pricing for sports programming (which is of very low importance to me overall).


----------



## ThomasM (Jul 20, 2007)

I have been with DirecTV for over 12 years and there is little I can think about that has gotten better with the exception of some of the receivers.

For example, think back to a (slightly) earlier DirecTV when you *didn't* have to deal with:

A commitment

Ridiculous price increases EVERY year making DirecTV more expensive than cable

Constant package shuffling and renaming so customers are so confused they don't know what package they have or if it's "grandfathered"

Leased receivers

Regional Sports Fee

Losing channels even if you don't change packages (hint:CLOO, NASA CCTV9)

$25 per month for the priviledge of having ONE HD DVR

Irritating in-guide ads

Slower than molasses receivers

Inability to use SD outputs on an HD receiver if it's set to HD resolution

Losing popular features like "dash-dash" delete or trickplay while viewing guide

If I work on it I can probably add to the list. In any event I still have SD service from DirecTV because I have no intention of starting a two year commitment when there are so many other choices popping up not to mention DirecTV's business policy of disregarding loyal long-term customers in favor of new customers.


----------



## mrro82 (Sep 12, 2012)

I'm fairly new to DirecTV. I signed up in September 2012. I had Charter for about 6 years prior to the switch. Comparing Charter to DirecTV is like night and day. The equipment, programming CSR's are all superior with DirecTV. SO overall I am very satisfied and will continue being a DirecTV subscriber for years to come.


----------



## dlt4 (Oct 4, 2006)

I've been with D* for 10 years as of this month. Obviously I've been very happy with them, and haven't found a better alternative.

My only real complaint is that since moving from AZ to FL last year I lose my signal with very little rainfall sometimes. I've had every thing checked by a tech and signal strengths are good.

But even still, the only way I'll give up D* is if I totally give up paid TV service and switch to Netflix, Roku, or whatever.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

carl6;3209297 said:


> I am very satisfied with the service and technology. I am reasonably unsatisfied with the cost. Over the past decade, almost every year when prices have gone up I have cut my service by either dropping receivers or lowering my service level. Despite that, I am still paying over $100 a month which for me is simply too much money for the amount of TV I watch.
> 
> I'm probably very close (maybe next year's price increase) to cutting the cord and bundling with my cable company (where I get internet service) for a substantial reduction in monthly cost. DirecTV is simply pricing itself out of my reach. My last reduction in service package has reached the point of dropping some channels I did not want to drop (including Root sports), a direct result/impact of the pricing for sports programming (which is of very low importance to me overall).


As if Dish is no different as they are getting almost as expensive but slightly cheaper than Directv, You should see how much Dish raise their AE Pak which is almost as much as what you pay for Premier package, Lets face it almost every tv provider raise their prices, which is why some consider cord cutting, but what happens if they do the same to Netflix or Hulu, a lot of people could say that sports programming is the vein from our existence, But could you imagine if they took that away, It would be a lot of PO'd people.


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

duffytoo said:


> If you are a sports fan, there is nothing to compete with Direct TV. I'm not happy with the cost but the options are just as expensive.


I'm a big sports fan in Oregon and love the PAC-12 and the Blazers. Yeah, DirecTV is awesome for sports fans!


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

MysteryMan said:


> My signature says it all.


So don't mine.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Laker44 said:


> So don't mine.


Whatever floats your boat.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Laker44 said:


> So don't mine.


No HD TVs? We only watch HD content.

Rich


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

MysteryMan said:


> Whatever floats your boat.





Rich said:


> No HD TVs? We only watch HD content.
> 
> Rich


*MysteryMan*, Would you stay with a provider if they didn't offer you the channels that you watch in the best quality available? :nono2: I don't think so.

*Rich*, I have 3 HD TVs and like you only watch HD content. But unfortunately DirecTV will not add the HD channel of ones that I watch the majority of the time, but my cable provider does.


----------



## Tubaman-Z (Jul 31, 2007)

fleckrj said:


> My only options are DirecTV, Dish, and Time Warner Cable. I dropped TWC in favor of DirecTV in 1998 and have never looked back. I have only had to call customer service about five times in the past 15 years, and I have never had any problems with them.


I am in a similar situation, but with less choice (no cable) due to living in a rural area - DirecTV, Dish, OTA, or streaming (over 3 MB DSL for $60/month - whoop dee do). We have had DirecTV since 1995 and the only thing I am dissatisfied with is the the price. I have only rarely had to interact with customer service, I've really appreciated the additional channels, the addition of HD, and the DVRs (our 1st DirecTV DVR absolutely changed the way that we watch television). All that said, I am on a path down to having only 1 DVR and Choice - nothing else from DirecTV. And I only keep that for live sports access (Bears football - but not Sunday Ticket, Big Ten, and the Twins). If there was a lesser total cost, seasonal way to stream the sports I would be done with DirecTV and move to a home brew DVR for OTA plus streaming. Again, love the product, just not the cost.


----------



## Bill Broderick (Aug 25, 2006)

The only aspect of DirecTV that I've ever been dissatisfied with has been the installation and repair contractor that they use on Long Island (Mastec). I've found the majority of the technicians that I've had to deal with, at my home, to either be lazy or incompetent. I was actually forced to hire my own installer to install the Slimline that's currently on my roof after the Mastec installer said that I didn't have LOS (he was replacing an existing Phase III dish that had a perfect signal).

To be fair, I've been at the home of 2 friends when they has DirecTV installed and I found both of those installers to be excellent. I just haven't had that same luck at my house.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Laker44 said:


> ...
> But unfortunately DirecTV will not add the HD channel of ones that I watch the majority of the time, but my cable provider does.


Which channels?


----------



## FHSPSU67 (Jan 12, 2007)

See my signature.
Very satisfied customer here


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Laker44 said:


> *MysteryMan*, Would you stay with a provider if they didn't offer you the channels that you watch in the best quality available? :nono2: I don't think so.
> 
> *Rich*, I have 3 HD TVs and like you only watch HD content. But unfortunately DirecTV will not add the HD channel of ones that I watch the majority of the time, but my cable provider does.


If you're happy with Cable that's fine with me. The SD and HD channels we watch on DirecTV look just fine.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I'm dissatisfied with all providers, I'm just less dissatisfied with Directv.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Bill Broderick said:


> The only aspect of DirecTV that I've ever been dissatisfied with has been the installation and repair contractor that they use on Long Island (Mastec). I've found the majority of the technicians that I've had to deal with, at my home, to either be lazy or incompetent. I was actually forced to hire my own installer to install the Slimline that's currently on my roof after the Mastec installer said that I didn't have LOS (he was replacing an existing Phase III dish that had a perfect signal).
> 
> To be fair, I've been at the home of 2 friends when they has DirecTV installed and I found both of those installers to be excellent. I just haven't had that same luck at my house.


The installers are getting better. If you're fortunate enough to get a Tech, they've gotten better, too. Still not as good as I'd like to see, but better. We seem to have gotten lucky with D*'s contractor in my area.

Rich


----------



## bungi43 (Jan 17, 2011)

mystic7 said:


> What I mean is, when I was here before everyone talked up Directv like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Now, it seems like it's just one of many choices you could have made for tv service.
> 
> Has anything changed as far as customer service, underhanded dealings by directv (such as free NFL Ticket that ends up costing you as an example), or anything else? I just want to make sure I made the right choice going back while I still have time to cancel.
> 
> So, for the most part is everything hunky dory in the world of Directv? If you could drop the service, would you?


I'm not entirely thrilled how they've gone with the overseas call centers. It's not hard to get around, but annoying. It was one thing I thought was good, because I knew when I called I would get someone I understood.

But I also think their customer service has gotten a little worse too, from the standpoint in the past they always seemed to go out of their way to make a customer happy, and now they are much more content to not do anything for you.

I rarely have issues with my service. I'm not thrilled with how my bill seems to get higher each month, but honestly, that's just about every company. I have given some thought to pulling the plug, as most stuff now I can get elsewhere. It's the sports that keep me in, as where I live I have access to ESPN3, but not WatchESPN...so I'd miss a lot of college football.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> I'm dissatisfied with all providers, I'm just less dissatisfied with Directv.


That's the way I feel, too. Looks as if most folks are put off by the pricing. I've had a house that cost me less a month than my D* bill is now and I've had a house that cost me just about a $100 more than D*'s monthly bill.

But, D* has treated me very well and, for the moment, I'm satisfied. I just have a feeling that someone is gonna do the Internet streaming correctly and put everything in a cloud and put the cable and satellite businesses out on the street wondering what happened. Already, I get a much better picture on Hulu + (not the answer) and NetFlix (not the answer either) than I do on my 1080i D* content.

Rich


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

bungi43 said:


> I'm not entirely thrilled how they've gone with the overseas call centers. It's not hard to get around, but annoying. It was one thing I thought was good, because I knew when I called I would get someone I understood.
> 
> ...


I believe there's only 1 call center overseas (Philippines) with most being here.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> I believe there's only 1 call center overseas (Philippines) with most being here.


Having just spent a fruitless hour on a call to a Roku call center, I gotta say one D* call center that's not in the states is one too many. Just an opinion.

Rich


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Rich said:


> That's the way I feel, too. Looks as if most folks are put off by the pricing. I've had a house that cost me less a month than my D* bill is now and I've had a house that cost me just about a $100 more than D*'s monthly bill.
> 
> But, D* has treated me very well and, for the moment, I'm satisfied. I just have a feeling that someone is gonna do the Internet streaming correctly and put everything in a cloud and put the cable and satellite businesses out on the street wondering what happened. Already, I get a much better picture on Hulu + (not the answer) and NetFlix (not the answer either) than I do on my 1080i D* content.
> 
> Rich


You're forgetting there's a sizeable part of the population that doesn't have access to high speed internet. Cable and satellite aren't going anywhere for the foreseeable future.


----------



## bungi43 (Jan 17, 2011)

sigma1914 said:


> I believe there's only 1 call center overseas (Philippines) with most being here.


I had to call about 3 times in a week here about 2 weeks ago and each time I called that's what I got. All at different times, and using a few different responses. I noticed it in the past too, but not nearly as much as recently. I got to the point now where I just start saying retention, and then I get them to transfer me and it's to a rep in the US.



Rich said:


> Having just spent a fruitless hour on a call to a Roku call center, I gotta say one D* call center that's not in the states is one too many. Just an opinion.
> 
> Rich


Agreed 100%


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

DirecTV is more expensive for me than if I were to bundle triple play with my cable provider. But I have DirecTV because the technology is better. Local cable co doesn't have multiroom or mobile apps. They run I-Guide which is pretty basic - no pandora or YouTube on TV. The search is pretty anemic and theres no poster art or pictures of actors in the info. You cant even drill down and see actors other programs. The most advanced thing they have is caller ID on TV, but so does DirecTV! The other thing that irks me with cable is that HD channels are put up high in the guide. Before I bought my house in 2010 I was in an apartment with Comcast. It was a constant battle with the wife or guests to change the channel to the HD equivalent. DirecTV does this right!!!

DirecTV also has IP control which is super convenient with mobile control apps.

As far as Dish Network, our market is Eastern Arc. I have too many trees in that direction which thankfully does not interfere with DirecTV as it points elsewhere. 

DirecTV it is! Now if my local cable co. got with the program and updated their technology, I would re-evaluate because their pricing is better.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> But, D* has treated me very well and, for the moment, I'm satisfied. I just have a feeling that someone is gonna do the Internet streaming correctly and put everything in a cloud and put the cable and satellite businesses out on the street wondering what happened. Already, I get a much better picture on Hulu + (not the answer) and NetFlix (not the answer either) than I do on my 1080i D* content.
> 
> Rich


Today most cord cutters are people who don't watch much TV, so if they stream 30-60 minutes a day of content it doesn't add up to all that much. There's no way very many of the "average" TV viewers who watch 4 hours a day could cut the cord and stream four hours a day of full HD content. The providers don't have the bandwidth, the Internet backbone doesn't have the bandwidth, and your ISP doesn't have the bandwidth to deliver this to a good sized percentage of the population where you live (definitely true if you use cable, most likely true if you use DSL)

The way providers solve this sort of problem is via rationing. Either you get capped, or you pay much more for "unlimited" data when unlimited starts meaning terabytes per month for a lot of people instead of a very small number of outliers, or you do metered pricing, or everything gets too slow to stream during prime viewing hours in the evening. Just like what happened with cellular data once everyone got smartphones and started actually using it in large quantities. It was possible to do unlimited when only a few early adopters with iPhones and people using Blackberry mail made any real use of data, but once everyone had a smartphone, bye bye unlimited and hello slowdowns during prime hours and capped/metered pricing.

Cable providers who also provide Internet have a reason to dislike people cutting the cord. If too many do, they'll start raising the price of Internet and lowering the price of TV to fight back. If you have a decent DSL provider available you may not care, but some people only have slow DSL where they live and cable is their only real alternative for internet. Your fast DSL provider may become a crappy slow provider once a quarter of the people where you live are trying to stream HD content at once in the evening. Cord cutting works great today because not very many are doing it. If everyone starts doing it, since it doesn't scale it will stop being a viable alternative.

Then there's the problem of sports, for those who like sports. Today you can watch ESPN, Big Ten Network, and so on online, but only if you prove you already have that network through your TV provider. Just like with HBO. Sure, you can cheat the system by using a friend's login who still has TV, and they probably don't police it much today since it isn't costing them much, but once that changes and it costs them real money they'll probably start cracking down and suing people who are trying to cheat them.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> I believe there's only 1 call center overseas (Philippines) with most being here.


Luckily my wife is from the Philippines!

As for cutting the cord, I just can't. When I'm watching something I recorded, or On Demand, I feel like I'm cut off from the world, like if something happens in the world I won't know because the news can't break into a recording. I'm weird that way. Don't suggest I keep a radio on while watching Hulu either!


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

Laker44 said:


> *MysteryMan*, Would you stay with a provider if they didn't offer you the channels that you watch in the best quality available? :nono2: I don't think so.
> 
> *Rich*, I have 3 HD TVs and like you only watch HD content. But unfortunately DirecTV will not add the HD channel of ones that I watch the majority of the time, but my cable provider does.





sigma1914 said:


> Which channels?


GSN- majority owned by DirecTV Group Inc. 
G4- not carried by DirecTV
HSN
HUB
QVC- Parent company is the largest investor in DirecTV


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Keep in mind G4 goes away in a little more than a week. Of course if you are interested in Esquire Channel, doesn't make much difference.


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

Laker44 said:


> *MysteryMan*, Would you stay with a provider if they didn't offer you the channels that you watch in the best quality available? :nono2: I don't think so.





MysteryMan said:


> If you're happy with Cable that's fine with me. The SD and HD channels we watch on DirecTV look just fine.


You are in the minority about the SD channels looking fine. The forum have several threads and comments about DirecTV's bit-starved SD channels.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Laker44 said:


> GSN- majority owned by DirecTV Group Inc.
> G4- not carried by DirecTV
> HSN
> HUB
> QVC- Parent company is the largest investor in DirecTV


GSN - DirecTV owns 42%, Sony Pictures Television is the majority owner at 58%
G4 - Being re-branded as Esquire Network and focus on programming aimed at "metrosexual viewers"
HUB - I guess that you have kids and like old tv shows? That's cool...we all like different stuff.
QVC & HSN - You can buy all their stuff on their respective websites. QVC even allows anyone to watch it here... http://www.qvc.com/LiveShowDisplay?storeId=10251&catalogId=10151&langId=-1


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

And to be honest, qvc and hsn HD would get a huge yawn here if they came, worse than that if it meant less bandwidth for some more requested channels. They'd have to pay a lot of money to directv.

We all want more HD, directv has made improvements in terms of number per transponder, and of course working on DirecTV 14.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Laker44 said:


> You are in the minority about the SD channels looking fine. The forum have several threads and comments about DirecTV's bit-starved SD channels.


Read my post again. I never said all the SD channels on DirecTV look fine. Just the ones we watch.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Comcrap SD in our area is no different than Directv, in fact they both look bad, But HD is another story


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

Comcrap isnt as bad as MediaCommies imho; lucikly they aren't as presence as Comcast. Not fun trying to call in only having ivr tell you they don't have enough agents available for the call queue :-/


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

sigma1914 said:


> GSN - DirecTV owns 42%, Sony Pictures Television is the majority owner at 58%
> G4 - Being re-branded as Esquire Network and focus on programming aimed at "metrosexual viewers"
> HUB - I guess that you have kids and like old tv shows? That's cool...we all like different stuff.
> QVC & HSN - You can buy all their stuff on their respective websites. QVC even allows anyone to watch it here... http://www.qvc.com/LiveShowDisplay?storeId=10251&catalogId=10151&langId=-1


GSN-Why invest so much in a channel, but not offer it to your customers in the best quality possible?
G4- And one of the most requested channels on this forum
HUB- Yes it is cool, that we all have various different likes and dislikes
QVC & HSN- You can also go to various websites and watch movies, TV Shows and Sports programs and even purchase them. But which would prefer to watch them on.. your TV or Computer?


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

dpeters11 said:


> And to be honest, qvc and hsn HD would get a huge yawn here if they came, worse than that if it meant less bandwidth for some more requested channels. They'd have to pay a lot of money to directv.
> 
> We all want more HD, directv has made improvements in terms of number per transponder, and of course working on DirecTV 14.


Maybe a huge yawn here, where it is mostly males posting. But go on a forum where mostly females post on, and adding the Longhorn Network or PAC12 Network would get a huge yawn.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

Laker44 said:


> Maybe a huge yawn here, where it is mostly males posting. But go on a forum where mostly females post on, and adding the Longhorn Network or PAC12 Network would get a huge yawn.


Are you implying women don't like sports?!


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

sigma1914;3209909 said:


> G4 - Being re-branded as Esquire Network and focus on programming aimed at "metrosexual viewers]


G4 how ye has fallen. So instead of getting shows on games and technology it changed to how to style your hair and what brand flip flops to wear after labor day lol.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

MysteryMan said:


> Read my post again. I never said all the SD channels on DirecTV look fine. Just the ones we watch.


My granddaughter watches a lot of SD shows. But she watches them on a 50" 720p TV. The 720p sets seem to show SD content better than my three 1080p sets.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Laker44 said:


> GSN-Why invest so much in a channel, but not offer it to your customers in the best quality possible?
> G4- And one of the most requested channels on this forum
> HUB- Yes it is cool, that we all have various different likes and dislikes
> QVC & HSN- You can also go to various websites and watch movies, TV Shows and Sports programs and even purchase them. But which would prefer to watch them on.. your TV or Computer?


Personally, I don't watch TV content on my laptops or desktop. I do have a 24" LCD monitor on the desktop, but it sits next to a 1080p 42" TV. I can and do watch some shows using my laptop and a long (13') HDMI cable, but that's a bit of a PITA doing that.

Rich


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

goinsleeper said:


> Are you implying women don't like sports?!


:nono2:


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

That's usually the stereotype but not all are the same,


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

acostapimps;3210352 said:


> That's usually the stereotype but not all are the same,


Yup cause there are some men who don't like sports either.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Laker44;3210077 said:


> Maybe a huge yawn here, where it is mostly males posting. But go on a forum where mostly females post on, and adding the Longhorn Network or PAC12 Network would get a huge yawn.


Sure, their team cold be Big10.


----------



## fireponcoal (Sep 26, 2009)

I have DirecTV for HD sports and the incredible boxes and guide they offer. Have Fios as well and still think D* is slightly better overall. No Philly sports is the only drawback as far as D* is concerned. PQ on Fios is slightly better but it's really hardly noticeable.


----------



## Reggie3 (Feb 20, 2006)

Been with them since 96' and stuck with them in the early period when others had more HD channels (they were slow in getting the new birds up due to launch issues). Still have better picture and DVR capabilities than Comcast. On a personal note I have never liked Ergens morals at Dish.


----------



## Reggie3 (Feb 20, 2006)

Rich said:


> My granddaughter watches a lot of SD shows. But she watches them on a 50" 720p TV. The 720p sets seem to show SD content better than my three 1080p sets.
> 
> Rich


I have noticed that SD quality seems to be related to the TV more than anything else


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

I agree. Not all HDTV's are created equal.


Reggie3 said:


> I have noticed that SD quality seems to be related to the TV more than anything else


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

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.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Reggie3 said:


> I have noticed that SD quality seems to be related to the TV more than anything else


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.

Rich


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

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.)


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Reggie3 said:


> I have noticed that SD quality seems to be related to the TV more than anything else


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.


----------



## Jillxz (Jul 16, 2012)

carl6 said:


> I am very satisfied with the service and technology. I am reasonably unsatisfied with the cost. Over the past decade, almost every year when prices have gone up I have cut my service by either dropping receivers or lowering my service level. Despite that, I am still paying over $100 a month which for me is simply too much money for the amount of TV I watch.
> 
> I'm probably very close (maybe next year's price increase) to cutting the cord and bundling with my cable company (where I get internet service) for a substantial reduction in monthly cost. DirecTV is simply pricing itself out of my reach. My last reduction in service package has reached the point of dropping some channels I did not want to drop (including Root sports), a direct result/impact of the pricing for sports programming (which is of very low importance to me overall).


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.


----------



## archer75 (Oct 13, 2006)

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.


----------



## lokar (Oct 8, 2006)

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.


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

Reggie3 said:


> I have noticed that SD quality seems to be related to the TV more than anything else


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.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Jillxz said:


> 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.


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).


----------



## mitchflorida (May 18, 2009)

Rich said:


> My granddaughter watches a lot of SD shows. But she watches them on a 50" 720p TV. The 720p sets seem to show SD content better than my three 1080p sets.
> 
> Rich


The smaller the screen , the better SD looks. I can't watch it anymore on my 73", and DTV is the worst for SD.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

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!?!?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

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.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

dpeters11 said:


> 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.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

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.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

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.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

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.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

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.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

mystic7 said:


> 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.


So as long as you're watching a still picture, you're good? That would be great if most shows had no motion.


----------



## ThomasM (Jul 20, 2007)

Laker44 said:


> You are in the minority about the SD channels looking fine. The forum have several threads and comments about DirecTV's bit-starved SD channels.


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....


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

dpeters11 said:


> 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.


Maybe they believe in the Ted Stevens "series of tubes", so the bigger the tube the faster the Internet! :rolling:


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

ThomasM said:


> I would be really curious if anyone could actually verify that DirecTV has reduced their PQ on their SD feeds....


I don't know if there has been a reduction recently but it's been crappy for years and complaints about the quality of Directv's SD on this site go way back. IIRC, the resolution is cut, right up front, and is not 640x480. When you throw in compression, you get a sub-standard pic. Fortunately, I rarely watch SD on my main TV, but unfortunately, my bedroom TV is still a CRT.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

goinsleeper said:


> So as long as you're watching a still picture, you're good? That would be great if most shows had no motion.


I didn't say that. Plus I'm with Directv again, so what's the point of "mocking" my tv provider?


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

mdavej said:


> 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.


No, my question was is everyone still happy with Directv. Last time I was here almost 2 years ago you would think Directv was the greatest invention ever and even thinking of going to Time Warner was sacreligious. I didn't see any posts like that when I came back so I was just wondering if Directv's reputation had gone downhill in the past 2 years, that's all.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

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.

You must be referring to their ad in The Onion


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

goinsleeper said:


> So as long as you're watching a still picture, you're good? That would be great if most shows had no motion.


 :mellow:

so typically any show where Kim Kardashian is acting lol
drums rolls please
applause
close curtains


----------



## Laker44 (Jun 18, 2008)

ThomasM said:


> 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....


One of the HDTV's I have is a 37" Toshiba Regaza, that has been professionally calibrated. When I subscribed to DirecTV in Jan 2008 but still subscribed to the lowest tier of cable, the SD picture was better then cable. But after DirecTV did an update in 2009, I saw a reduction in picture quality with DirecTV and on cable it was better.


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

The SD picture on my ClearQAM tuner with my cable company is better than the SD picture over DirecTV. Though the local cable company is putting 10 MPEG2 SD channels in one RF space. 38.8mbps / 10 = 3.88mbps per SD feed (mpeg2). DirecTV obviously doesn't have the bandwidth on 101 where a lot of legacy single lnb dishes are pointing. So they must be cramming a lot more per transponder. Not entirely sure the Mbps on a transponder, but since they are doing MPEG2 it's not efficient as it could be.

Once the rest of Comcast / NBCU and AMC Networks properties go HD along with The HUB, it's likely I won't have SD on ever again, except for the occasional Discovery Health, Nick JR, Babyfirst.

Knowing that the D14 satellite will be launched is a great testament to the enormous capacity boost that will provide us with the likelihood of all of those remaining networks going HD.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

Volatility said:


> :mellow:
> 
> so typically any show where Kim Kardashian is acting lol
> drums rolls please
> ...


I hope you edited that joke to make it worse because you sure didn't make it better.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

cypherx said:


> The SD picture on my ClearQAM tuner with my cable company is better than the SD picture over DirecTV. Though the local cable company is putting 10 MPEG2 SD channels in one RF space. 38.8mbps / 10 = 3.88mbps per SD feed (mpeg2). DirecTV obviously doesn't have the bandwidth on 101 where a lot of legacy single lnb dishes are pointing. So they must be cramming a lot more per transponder. Not entirely sure the Mbps on a transponder, but since they are doing MPEG2 it's not efficient as it could be.


Just because they have 10 SD QAM channels in a single RF channel doesn't mean they're all the same bandwidth. They might have shopping channels or news channels that can get by with a lot less, and use more for others. Or use VBR on them all and dynamically change the bandwidth used by each as needed, similar to network QoS schemes.

I don't ever use Directv SD channels or cable SD channels (except a couple like TCM that my cable company doesn't provide in HD) so I can't compare them, but since they publish their mapping for the clear QAM channels I can see how many they pack in per RF channel. I see one with 13 that besides WGN, has a mismash of shopping and religious channels that don't need much bandwidth. There are others with 10, 11, 12, 9 and 5. The one with 5 has ESPN, ESPN2, CSNCH, and NatGEO, along with the Weather Channel. Somehow I'm betting it was no accident they did that, and that the Weather Channel isn't getting the same bandwidth allocation as ESPN 

I'm honestly not surprised Directv has reduced SD quality over the years and would expect they'll do it more and more even if they have the bandwidth for it. Great way to get the SD laggards to upgrade to HD receivers. People who still have SD receivers they're watching regularly in 2013 are most likely people who don't care about the quality of their TV experience, don't like to spend much money on their TV experience and/or just don't care all that much about TV in general.

They're the most likely candidates to cut the cord, and least likely candidates to spend extra money on upgraded packages or PPV movies. I'm sure there are exceptions, but in general you'd expect the people who care more about TV and the TV viewing experience and are willing to spend money on it to have HDTVs and HD receivers. Directv probably makes very little from most of the customers still clinging to SD - no extra fees that everyone with HD and DVRs pay. I'll bet they wouldn't be too sorry to see many of them go. Looks like they may be helping push them a bit in several ways:

1) Changes to the protection plan etc. to make it easier for customers still on SD to upgrade to HD or Genie
2) Obsoleting all the receivers older than 2004 or so via disabling the old guide
3) _Perhaps_ slowly degrading SD quality to further incentivize upgrades to HD, and get the customers who refuse to upgrade to voluntarily leave


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

Slowly degrading SD is not an option. That would only be an option if every channel were available in HD. For example we watch Best Ink on Oxygen, which normally airs new episodes every Wednesday night. Oxygen already looks like sh*t in SD. No sense to make it look even worse. To be honest I play some Baby Einstein videos for my 5 month old daughter through the YouTube feature on the HR24 DVR. Those YouTube clips look better than the SD on DirecTV.

OK yeah SD looks like crap, so you upgrade... but then you still can't get all those channels in HD unless you pay out the wazoo and subscribe to two providers. Could I get a lot of those basics like Oxygen, The Hub, Reelz, Style, etc.. in HD? Sure if I went with cable. But then I'd lose things like HBO2, HBO Signature, HBO Family, and other premium multi-screens. So no way do I have enough disposable income to subscribe to two providers, have two set top boxes, two different remotes and have to teach everyone how to juggle two inputs on the TV. 

DirecTV has more of what I want from a provider than Cable... just not all of it. I think when D14 launches they will have so much bandwidth that getting the rest of the channels in HD shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

mystic7 said:


> I hope you edited that joke to make it worse because you sure didn't make it better.


meh


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

Volatility said:


> meh


Touche


----------



## ThomasM (Jul 20, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> People who still have SD receivers they're watching regularly in 2013 are most likely people who don't care about the quality of their TV experience, don't like to spend much money on their TV experience and/or just don't care all that much about TV in general.


Well, you're 33% correct in my case. I don't like to spend OUTRAGEOUS amounts of money on my TV experience. Plain old SD DirecTV is expensive enough without adding things like whole-home and HD fees. And I certainly don't want to be stuck with DirecTV for another 2 years considering their price increases.

What you forgot to mention is that there are a lot of viewers who like old TV programs (classic TV) and movies none of which are in HD anyway. I am one of those viewers. And anyone who pays for ANY DirecTV service must care for TV considering how expensive it is.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

mystic7 said:


> I didn't say that. Plus I'm with Directv again, so what's the point of "mocking" my tv provider?


I was merely showing the irony. I have some movies that I stream from my computer to the TV and they may be in 1080p, but if the bit rate isn't there, the resolution is almost irrelevant. Having 1080 at 5 fps is still 1080 but would be unwatchable.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Some subs don't care or don't know much about HD when they still have tube tv's, Plus they don't want any more fees, And I don't know why people say sd looks worse on Directv, Duh you have a HDTV of course it's gonna look bad, you just never noticed when you had sd tv's, Plus if you have a bigger tv you'll notice it a lot more compared to a small set. Try switching to a tube tv to see what I'm talking about


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

ThomasM said:


> Well, you're 33% correct in my case. I don't like to spend OUTRAGEOUS amounts of money on my TV experience. Plain old SD DirecTV is expensive enough without adding things like whole-home and HD fees. And I certainly don't want to be stuck with DirecTV for another 2 years considering their price increases.
> 
> What you forgot to mention is that there are a lot of viewers who like old TV programs (classic TV) and movies none of which are in HD anyway. I am one of those viewers. And anyone who pays for ANY DirecTV service must care for TV considering how expensive it is.


Have you ever seen some of those classic TV shows and movies in HD? There's a tremendous difference in picture quality.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

acostapimps said:


> Some subs don't care or don't know much about HD when they still have tube tv's, Plus they don't want any more fees, And I don't know why people say sd looks worse on Directv, Duh you have a HDTV of course it's gonna look bad, you just never noticed when you had sd tv's, Plus if you have a bigger tv you'll notice it a lot more compared to a small set. Try switching to a tube tv to see what I'm talking about


Not true. I had Directv before. When I switched to Time Warner I noticed their SD was excellent, and I notice now, coming back to Directv, how bad their SD is. However I don't watch SD, I notice it in the SD commercials on HD channels. And as I said before, if TIme Warner raised the quality of their HD (it's terribly compressed) they would have to lower the quality of the SD. The ol' Catch 22.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

It seems as though cable companies are missing a trick by making higher quality HD a tradeoff with lower quality SD. It makes sense, most are limited to a top frequency of 750 to 850 MHz. Analog channels, which most still have, are very wasteful of bandwidth, and having SD duplicates of all channels and broadcasting them in MPEG2, is also wasteful. Can't really go higher than 850 MHz because they don't want to have to start rewiring homes like satellite providers sometimes have to.

But nothing stops them from using more bandwidth from the headend to the curb. They might need to upgrade some equipment along the path to handle the higher frequencies, but most of us know that many splitters and other passive devices rated for cable frequencies work just fine on satellite frequencies. We only pay extra for the higher rated stuff for peace of mind.

Cable companies could offer a 'high quality' package that included everything in top quality MPEG4 HD except for the channels that are only available in SD (which would be top quality MPEG4 as well) There would be no analog channels at all, and no SD duplicates of HD channels. Broadcast this at >1 GHz from the headend so it would run in parallel with the signal everyone gets today. That way you don't have to stop providing the analog channels and full SD content that people who are still using SD sets want to keep receiving.

Customers who order this would have a frequency shifter installed on their line where it splits off to go to their house that downshifts the frequency to the normal cable range so it would work with their house wiring. This frequency shifting is really no different than what a B band converter (or a LNB or SWM multiswitch) does, and those are inexpensive because they're manufactured in quantity. A big cable provider like TWC could order these by the millions and get the price down, and they could get whatever they do cost back on the install charge for the 'HQ package'.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

MysteryMan said:


> Have you ever seen some of those classic TV shows and movies in HD? There's a tremendous difference in picture quality.


Yes, there is. I do watch oldies at times and find them very watchable in HD.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

OK got a phone call/Voicemail from Directv on Friday, Stating that my 12 month promos are expired as of this month. If I wanted call them back and see what offers are available to me.
Ok so I call them back with getting a C31 in mind as an upgrade.

So first I listen at what they have to offer me, and it was 3 months Free of HBO,MAX,Starz,Showtime $141 value.
I said OK how about a Free upgrade to a C31 instead of the premiums That's a $99 value and you get a 24 month commitment out of me.
They said NO! the best they could do is $70 including shipping.

I SAID NO! I don't get it? I'm a little displeased.

What is this really costing them to upgrade me a C31. Shipping charges?? What the He!!. Lets review, It Cost me $260 in upfront charges when I started, I've paid $115 per month for 10 months, $95 for 2. I hooked them up with 2 customers

So even with my first 12 month promos I've paid them $1600.
Next 12 months are projected at another minimum $*1700-$2200.* Wouldn't you think they would rather Eat $99 to secure another 24 month commitment that puts $3400-$4400 in their bank.

I guess they would rather give me the free premiums and just settle for the $1600.LOL


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

damondlt said:


> So first I listen at what they have to offer me, and it was 3 months Free of HBO,MAX,Starz,Showtime $141 value.
> I said OK how about a Free upgrade to a C31 instead of the premiums That's a $99 value and you get a 24 month commitment out of me.
> They said NO! the best they could do is $70 including shipping.
> 
> I SAID NO! I don't get it? I'm a little displeased.


The premium channels would be a great value for you and they obviously arent paying the $141 to send them to you. On the other hand, they do eat some of the cost for the clients. So as far as a business judgement, it's much cheaper for them to give you free premiums.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

goinsleeper said:


> . So as far as a business judgement, it's much cheaper for them to give you free premiums.


Yep, and its much cheaper for me not to upgrade with them for another 24 months either from a business stand point. :contract:

A lot can happen with providers in a year so maybe I'll just play out my contract and see what my options are.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

damondlt said:


> > . So as far as a business judgement, it's much cheaper for them to give you free premiums.
> 
> 
> Yep, and its much cheaper for me not to upgrade with them for another 24 months either from a business stand point. :contract: A lot can happen with providers in a year so maybe I'll just play out my contract and see what my options are.


That's what I'm going to do too, when my commitment expires see what goodies I can get, so they can hook me up for 2 years again, If its not what I'm hoping for than no dice. Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

If only they can upgrade me on discounted HR44 by then when my contract expires early next year, Or will it be like the HR2x where they send you whatever model they have available and not guaranteed?


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

acostapimps said:


> If only they can upgrade me on discounted HR44 by then when my contract expires early next year, Or will it be like the HR2x where they send you whatever model they have available and not guaranteed?


You may get an hr44 or an hr34... it is the same where it isn't gaurenteed.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

Volatility said:


> You may get an hr44 or an hr34... it is the same where it isn't gaurenteed.


Can we Pin this information? I swear it's been asked over a dozen times in the last 2 weeks and answered everytime.


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

goinsleeper said:


> Can we Pin this information? I swear it's been asked over a dozen times in the last 2 weeks and answered everytime.


+1 I concur. As a customer, one might think when placing an upgrade you would get the newest reciever available at time, however that would be pretty expensive for DirecTV to manufacture that many particular receivers for every time a customer calls in for an upgrade. im thinking they don't do it because of cost factors.


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

goinsleeper said:


> Can we Pin this information? I swear it's been asked over a dozen times in the last 2 weeks and answered everytime.


First of all I already knew that information as I was being sarcastic, but they should really make an exception for existing customers that want to upgrade to new equipment if they want to promote if they ever their new Genie.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

acostapimps said:


> First of all I already knew that information as I was being sarcastic, but they should really make an exception for existing customers that want to upgrade to new equipment if they want to promote if they ever their new Genie.


I agree, it would be nice if the model could be specified but it would be abused. No provider wants to start new customers off with really old equipment to make sure existing customers have it because that's going to ruin the initial look at the new service. On the other hand, how long would you have to be a customer before the option to specify a model was available. Too many factors to warrant the ability to do so. If they could just get all their equipment on the same page, this wouldn't even be necessary, and maybe that's where everything will end up. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

goinsleeper said:


> I agree, it would be nice if the model could be specified but it would be abused. No provider wants to start new customers off with really old equipment to make sure existing customers have it because that's going to ruin the initial look at the new service. On the other hand, how long would you have to be a customer before the option to specify a model was available. Too many factors to warrant the ability to do so. If they could just get all their equipment on the same page, this wouldn't even be necessary, and maybe that's where everything will end up. Fingers crossed.


It would be nice if they allowed certain customers to specify models, but cost wise I don't see how they could do that as they have too many loyal customers It would mean they would have to manufacture more models of that receiver than they currently do and they already take a lost selling the receivers below the actual value at lease. Shortage problems may also come up with doing that. I had always thought they shipped out random models because of cost and other issues that hinder their ability to do so they send out different models that are in the local home office warehouse at the time. Hopefully one day though, this request will become a reality.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

Volatility said:


> It would be nice if they allowed certain customers to specify models, but cost wise I don't see how they could do that as they have too many loyal customers It would mean they would have to manufacture more models of that receiver than they currently do and they already take a lost selling the receivers below the actual value at lease. Shortage problems may also come up with doing that. I had always thought they shipped out random models because of cost and other issues that hinder their ability to do so they send out different models that are in the local home office warehouse at the time. Hopefully one day though, this request will become a reality.


They obviously keep up with the models now though. An HR24 is now swapped with another HR24 if the units needs to be replaced based on technical issues. As nice as it would be to specify a model during upgrade, I doubt that will ever happen. Best bet is to have a technician do the upgrade as they usually have newer equipment.


----------



## Volatility (May 22, 2010)

goinsleeper said:


> They obviously keep up with the models now though. An HR24 is now swapped with another HR24 if the units needs to be replaced based on technical issues. As nice as it would be to specify a model during upgrade, I doubt that will ever happen. Best bet is to have a technician do the upgrade as they usually have newer equipment.


I'm familiar with the first part, I was referring to upgrades only not erps. Most def on the installer being the best bet on getting the newer equipment.


----------

