# Dish HD is not High Definition



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

It is highly compressed and a great deal of the resolution is lost.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Welcome!

BTW, we know.


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

Then Dishes advertising is fraudulent.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

algiea said:


> Then Dishes advertising is fraudulent.


Both D* and E* stretch the truth.


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

Sounds like a perfect class action to me.

Its like selling 45 octane gas for 85 octane.

Real HD is beautiful. At best what we get is BIG SD.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

algiea said:


> Sounds like a perfect class action to me.
> 
> Its like selling 45 octane gas for 85 octane.
> 
> Real HD is beautiful. At best what we get is BIG SD.


It's not that big of a difference really. Watch out calling for class actions around here, I think it's frowned upon. Plus, E* already has enough settling to do with Tivo I think.

Enjoy the forums, and again, welcome.


----------



## Nonno (Feb 10, 2009)

I don't know, maybe I'm not seeing things the experts see but I think Dish HD is very good. Now if you said Comcast HD, well yes, you can see it's compressed. I'm very satisfied with the quality of Dish's HD.


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

Sorry to disagree, it is lousy.

I don't understand why political politeness trumps talking about fraud.

If you bought anything, but got only 1/4 of what you thought your purchased, what would you do? What if you found out everyone was getting 1/4 of what they purchased.

If they advertised that they supplied 1920 x 1080, but with the resolution of SD, then they would be truthful. But they don't. Its not a stretch--its a lie


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

algiea said:


> I don't understand why political politeness trumps talking about fraud.


It doesn't. But this isn't some soapbox for you to climb upon and call for a class action lawsuit on your third post to the forums.

I'm sorry you are disappointed with your service, but I can't give you too much sympathy. There is so much information and reviews about everything you could ever want to know online, you could have done more homework before getting locked into 2 years of service.

Truth, stretch, or outright lie, the way D* and E* go at each other with all their features that one offers over the other and how some of E* is HD "half the time", that should raise a flag to do some deeper research.

I don't recommend buying or signing up for anything that is expensive or long term before reading as much about it as you can find online.


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

I believed what they advertised, and was mislead

You must work for Dish.

I am outta here.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

What part of the HD spec do they not follow?


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

There is no truth in advertising anymore. 

No, I don't work for dish or D*.

See ya.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I have a bad feeling about this thread...

To be truthful, we aren't likely to ever see "true" HD ever in a broadcast medium. The bitrates on uncompressed HD resolution would be unreal!

Dish doesn't do it... DirecTV doesn't... Cable doesn't... neither does FIOS or OTA... and even Blu-ray isn't giving you uncompressed video in HD resolution!

Unless you are filming it yourself with one of those hollywood mega-expensive cameras... you aren't likely to ever see uncompressed HD,

You could see better than HD resolution, though, if you go to a movie theater and watch a film that was shot on 35/70 mm film and shown on a film projector!

Or of course, looking out your window at real life is the best possible uncompressed resolution AND it is completely wireless transmission!


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

The do output the horizontal pixel count and the number of lines as HD, but the content is highly compressed removing detail picture information. 

The format is HD, but the content is so highly compressed, the fine picture detail is lost making it look like Big SD


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

Bad feeling or not, the fact remains that Dish HD is lousy. Other compressed mediums which allow higher bit rate looks better.

I am NOT advocating full res HD at 1.5 gbs for these channels, but Blu Ray, broadcast do deliver higher bit rate Hd and they looks pretty decent.

It would seem you'should be defending the user experience, rather than Dishes choice to diminish resolution but sell it as HD

How on earth can you defend your position?


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

algiea said:


> The do output the horizontal pixel count and the number of lines as HD, but the content is highly compressed removing detail picture information.
> 
> The format is HD, but the content is so highly compressed, the fine picture detail is lost making it look like Big SD


So it does meet HD standards, just not to your liking which means there is no false advertising. Seems like you are the one making false statements 

BTW, I thought you said you were outta here? Another false statement?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Dish HD is adequate HD when I compare it to cable and DirecTV, and OTA. When you compare it to Blu Ray you are comparing it to something that is not being achieved by any TV channel available to the general public. But to say Dish HD is not High Definition is just silly.


> At a minimum, HDTV has twice the linear resolution of standard-definition television (SDTV), thus showing greater detail than either analog television or regular DVD. The technical standards for broadcasting HDTV also handle the 16:9 aspect ratio images without using letterboxing or anamorphic stretching, thus increasing the effective image resolution.
> 
> The optimum format for a broadcast depends upon the type of videographic recording medium used and the image's characteristics. The field and frame rate should match the source and the resolution. A very high resolution source may require more bandwidth than available in order to be transmitted without loss of fidelity. The lossy compression that is used in all digital HDTV storage and transmission systems will distort the received picture, when compared to the uncompressed source.


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

Pearls to swine


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

algiea said:


> Pearls to swine


Yes, that is a great way to describe all our replies.


----------



## algiea (Mar 5, 2010)

Hoink Hoink is a better


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

who's that clip-clopping on my bridge?


----------



## etzeppy (Feb 16, 2007)

HobbyTalk said:


> BTW, I thought you said you were outta here? Another false statement?


:lol:


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Itsa D* troll, people. I can smell one coming a mile away


----------



## Parrothead (Mar 24, 2005)

You have to realize that a lot of TV shows are intentionally filming with a grainy picture. Too many actresses were complaining of everyone seeing their pimples. You watch a new episode of Law and Order or Burn Notice and you can see it's filmed thru a filter or whatever....Then put on HBO and watch an animated feature. It looks GREAT. So be careful comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## Cold Irons (Dec 7, 2005)

algiea said:


> Sounds like a perfect class action to me.
> 
> Its like selling 45 octane gas for 85 octane.
> 
> Real HD is beautiful. At best what we get is BIG SD.


Perfect. Another idiot that wants to make lawyers richer....


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Gentlemen and ladies, 

I'm closing this thread pending an investigation from a Dish moderator. In general we do not condone name-calling, rudeness, or calls for class action suits here, per forum rules.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Sounds good to me ...

Be polite people!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I think the original thought was expressed, and reasonable discussion already exhausted on this particular topic.

If not already closed, I would have closed it myself at this point.


----------

