# HD Forum Boring again, in a good way!



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

Ok, now that we have more HD than just about anyone, it's going to be boring around the E* HD forum, but in a good way. 

We have Speed HD (woo hoo!) that "everyone" wanted, and quite a few other new additions. I've never heard of MAVTV, but it looks nice for those adolescent and adolescent wannabe men like me; roller derby and bikini shows on daily it seems? How cool is that, lol.

It seems like we're "in the lead" again, so I guess I need to head over to the D* forum to see any "we need more HD!" fun now.

In all seriousness, I am LOVING Speed HD, thank you so much Dish finally! I love motorcycle racing, and have gotten to see some FIM World Superbike (Go Ben Spies!), some AMA superbike, and some good MotoGP racing the last few days. It doesn't look like full HD, I think PAL upconverted, but it's 16x9, and looks better than SD by far.

Now I can just b*tch that some "HD" channels (CMT, VH1, MTV to name a few) aren't really HD at all, but that isn't Dish's fault; the providers need to get their act together and get with the program.

So anyway, life is good (again) for us Dish owners, eh? I for one love my Dish service, and unless something very strange happened I can't imagine dropping it for anything else. I know it's cyclical, we'll get leap frogged someday and the moaning will resume, but that's just life.

A VIP722 setup with OTA is a very powerful device, able to record up to three HD programs at once (722K up to four), and I still find it by far the best DVR I've ever used.

Ok, not drinking too much cool aid, but life is pretty good for Dish subs right now eh? I was even happy with my latest support experience (online chat.) I am loving all my TV viewing experiences lately...:grin:


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Hey! I'm a grumpy old man. I want more! AMC, BBCA, and my local PBS and The CW stations for instance. I'll never quit wanting more.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

phrelin said:


> Hey! I'm a grumpy old man. I want more! AMC, BBCA, and my local PBS and The CW stations for instance. I'll never quit wanting more.


We don't have a CW in HD local so I'd love to see a nationwide CWHD feed - probably not gonna happen though.


----------



## garys (Nov 4, 2005)

bobukcat said:


> We don't have a CW in HD local so I'd love to see a nationwide CWHD feed - probably not gonna happen though.


Doubt it since NY CW PIX is also one of the superstations and has been available to the NY market for some time now in HD. It hasn't been added to the superstation package.


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

garys said:


> Doubt it since NY CW PIX is also one of the superstations and has been available to the NY market for some time now in HD. It hasn't been added to the superstation package.


Anyone know why not?


----------



## iamnotherbert (Mar 9, 2009)

ZBoomer said:


> We have Speed HD (woo hoo!) that "everyone" wanted, and quite a few other new additions.


"We" is everyone but TurboHD customers...you know, those that signed up specifically for HD content. Ridiculous not to offer those channels on any TurboHD tier. There's still plenty of griping to be had.


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

^^^ Totally agree on the Turbo argument, what's up with that anyway? Seems the all-HD tiers would get the new HD channels, I don't get that at all!


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

The problem with the TurboHD packages for *Dish Network* is that the media conglomerates owning the channels don't like restricted access to parts of their cable channel empires. They don't see their business plan as divided into HD and SD. An HD-only package is foreign and smells of a backdoor a la carte approach. You want HD channel X owned by United Conglomerates, you pay for their SD channel Y as well.

TurboHD was a quick-fix marketing move in the short term, but an obvious future customer backlash disaster to anyone at DIsh with half a brain.

The customer can easily get the channels - just agree to pay more per month ($15 for Classic Bronze with HD, $18 for Silver or Gold Classic with HD).

For years I've been paying for Classic Silver now with HD which includes over 200 channels of which exactly 15 cable channels we record from - at a cost of roughly $3 per channel. I pay $1 per month for each of the 5 local broadcast channels we record from. I pay $7 a month for 7 premium channels we record from, though at various times like right now we get discounts on these. If I take my total bill including taxes but before discounts, I'm paying $4.44 per month per channel used. I know I'm paying a lot of money for ESPN channels I never use, for 24-hour news channels I don't watch, etc. But that's the Devil's Bargain for me to be able to watch FX and AMC. I want them and I don't blame Dish for the cost.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Seems to me that E* could lite up the sd counterparts to the channels that TUBRO lacks if they wanted too. They might have to pay the providers but it could be done


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

I understand the issues you guys mention, but I thought with Turbo HD package, Dish actually turned on SD channels that match the HD ones you get?

I've actually seen people on this board COMPLAIN about this, they wanted HD only, and complained they were getting the SD versions of the HD channels, lol.

I do agree the Turbo HD thing is purely a marketing thing; I watch like 95% HD stuff now, but find the classic package I have much more desirable anyway.


----------



## iamnotherbert (Mar 9, 2009)

ZBoomer said:


> I understand the issues you guys mention, but I thought with Turbo HD package, Dish actually turned on SD channels that match the HD ones you get?


They do, but so what? That wasn't the point of phrelin's rant. The point was that content providers who own both HD and non-HD channels (non-HD being an SD channel with no HD counterpart) want to force all or nothing down consumers' throats. They don't like piecemeal.

I don't care about non-HD channels. I wouldn't watch them and I don't want to pay for them. Content providers can take their SD-only content and shove it sideways.

What I want is FX-HD. I'd friggin' pay for it on the Platinum tier. But I'm not buying a bundle of Classic SD crap just so I can get FX-HD.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, for what it is worth, Scott had a meet and greet after team summit last week with Charlie and all the executives and the first 15 sat guy members that wanted in. They say that they can not expound about it to much because it was an off the record meeting but that all of the executives now know about the TurboHD problem (they all were not aware about it!) and they claim that a soulution is in the works for the problem. I do know that Bobabird of the EKB was in attendance at the meeting, maybe if he sees this thread he could tells us a little more? There is also a thread in the sticky area over at the other site if ya'll are interested.


----------



## grooves12 (Oct 27, 2005)

The thing is that the TurboHD package was a good idea in the beginning when the HD package was very limited... but it is reaching the tipping point to where it can no longer exist at a price lower than one that also includes SD.

Think about it... at some point nearly every channel will be in HD, so why should HD customers pay LESS than SD customers?? Also, many of the stations make a majority of their funds from advertising. So, this is why they bundle their lesser known channels with ones the provider will pay for. It allows them to make more money, and if they allow the HD channels to get included in a package for a price cheaper than includes the other ones, they lose a LOT of advertising revenue. So I think you will see less and less providers allow a package like this to exist.

Its the same discussion that happens with a la carte programming...


My guess is the solution to the TurboHD packages... is simply going to be to eliminate them and go back to the old method, and then at some point just raise the prices for everyone and make HD part of the "standard" package.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, it is going to be different when we can get everybody to go to mpeg4 compatible recievers. When that wonderful day comes SD/HD will be a moot point. It will all be one package and the type of TV you have will decide what resolution you get on the HD channels.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Not to mention the huge amount of bandwidth that will free up.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

jclewter79 said:


> ... maybe if he sees this thread he could tells us a little more?


They didn't tell us all that much, as I'm sure they didn't want to divulge what is in their contracts. On an unrelated note, some of you may have noticed I will occasionally post to correct the smallest of mistakes in a thread.  We did let them know there was anger from a growing number of people who aren't getting channels they had a completely reasonable expectation of receiving (Turbo Silver get the HD version, if available, of channels in Classic Silver. silver=silver).


----------



## tsmacro (Apr 28, 2005)

phrelin said:


> Hey! I'm a grumpy old man. I want more! AMC, BBCA, and my local PBS and The CW stations for instance. I'll never quit wanting more.


In my DMA (Indy) I actually do get CW in HD, but not NBC. So i'll trade ya a CW for a NBC! :lol: Actually doesn't matter too much anyway for me because I do have the OTA hooked up and I get HD NBC from two cities that way. I also get more PBS channels than I know what to do with, the Indy DMA now broadcasts 3 via satellite and one of them I also get OTA so I can watch that one in HD. But then there's the Ft Wayne OTA that has 1 main channel plus 3 subs broadcasting at all times, so no HD there obviously. So if you really like PBS I guess i'm in the place to be! :grin:


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, I guess there is always room to complain but, I think everybody has to admit that E* is a good place to be these days.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

jclewter79 said:


> Well, I guess there is always room to complain but, I think everybody has to admit that E* is a good place to be these days.


Yep. But there is always room....


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

That was my point; it doesn't seem very long ago at all I had D*, and like 4-5 HD channels, or something like that. Man all I remember is ESPN-HD, HDNET, and a couple others.

Then I had Dish and like 15 for a while. That was a big deal, we had SO many more HD channels than D*, lol.

Just in the past year or two we've gotten so much new HD it's crazy; we can always find something imperfect, but it's pretty good right now.


----------



## AlbuquerqueJohn (May 30, 2009)

Oh goodie! More HD ........ HD that is breaking up and sounding like a machine gun tonight. Yea, I'm so happy to be paying a fortune for 'INTERRUPTED PROGRAMS"! 

Come on DN big shots! Get the program correct before you dump it on unsuspecting customers!


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Hey! I'm a grumpy old man. I want more! AMC, BBCA, and my local PBS and The CW stations for instance. I'll never quit wanting more.


The CW isn't for us old geezers. I'm waiting for IFC HD.


----------

