# Hopefully 2009 will be a better year than 2008 for us: DirecTV on wrong track IMO



## PennHORN (Sep 13, 2007)

I have been disappointed with the news coming from DirecTV the past few months. I can't believe ESPNU HD was not added prior to college football season despite promises from DirecTV that we would be getting it. I have Premier and it pisses me off that I get fewer HD premiums than any other provider in my area.

It seems that any advantage DirecTV gained in 2007 has been pissed away this past year as Dish seems to have caught up or surpassed DirecTV with their HD lineup and cable chipping away at DirecTV's lead. My parents just got a 60 inch Kuro plasma and Dish's Vip 722. I was pretty impressed with that DVR. Their channel lineup also had Travel Channel HD which I covet and they have a ton of premium HDs.

I switched from cable almost a year and a half ago because DirecTV always seemed to be amongst the first to add new HD channels, they did not have the reputation of jacking rates frequently like cable, better sports packages, and good equipment. All of those reasons except for sports are no longer true really.

I have 9 more months on my contract and would rather not switch but I would like for DirecTV to add some national HDs that most would consider to be valuable like Travel Channel HD and ESPNUHD.

Raising prices on packages again and on PPVs now, especially in a tough economy, is not a good trend. I have not seen or heard of any improvement in customer service or installation since Liberty Media took over. I am disappointed that the PC tuner that they previewed at CES last year has been unceremoniously scrapped. Fundamental fixes STILL need to be made to the HR series. I just hope that DirecTV makes improvements this year. For the first time ever, I was jealous of my parent's Dish Network setup and that has never happened before.


----------



## meStevo (Jul 23, 2007)

DirecTV has come a long way in a year, and I look forward to what the next one brings. All the news I see about competitors ensure that I don't even think about trying them (Dish's multiple channel disputes resulting in them dropping channels... even if only temporarilly, Cable.... is cable).

You've got 9 months to wonder, I'd find ways to enjoy them and not try so hard to focus on what you don't like, otherwise it will be self fulfilling when the time comes, just justifying a decision made many months prior when you do make a switch.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Keep in mind within that 9 months we may get to see the new Tivo that Dish wont have either. Just my opinion but I think D* is focused on getting locals right now but I am sure they will be adding more HD channles soon. Hang in there.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

PennHORN said:


> I have been disappointed with the news coming from DirecTV the past few months. I can't believe ESPNU HD was not added prior to college football season despite promises from DirecTV that we would be getting it. I have Premier and it pisses me off that I get fewer HD premiums than any other provider in my area.


I don't recall EVER seeing Directv stating they where adding ESPNU and I definitely don't remember them setting a time that it was to be on... And how many of those games where in HD anyway? I ask because half the games on ABC for th3e PAC 10 this year where in SD... So who knows what they will do with ESPNU...

It is unfortunate they don't have more HBO's and Encore... But then, more than 60% of their programing in a month falls onto HBO east or west at some point, so it didn't really bother me... And your lucky if you area has that much HD. I'm in LA, and the other providers don't have more than...



PennHORN said:


> It seems that any advantage DirecTV gained in 2007 has been pissed away this past year as Dish seems to have caught up or surpassed DirecTV with their HD lineup and cable chipping away at DirecTV's lead. My parents just got a 60 inch Kuro plasma and Dish's Vip 722. I was pretty impressed with that DVR. Their channel lineup also had Travel Channel HD which I covet and they have a ton of premium HDs.


Hook up your HD DVR to your folks tv... I'll bet you see a difference in PQ...

And did you really think Directv would be that far out in front of everyone else for that long? Thats not realistic IMHO...



PennHORN said:


> I switched from cable almost a year and a half ago because DirecTV always seemed to be amongst the first to add new HD channels, they did not have the reputation of jacking rates frequently like cable, better sports packages, and good equipment. All of those reasons except for sports are no longer true really.


Directv is still adding more HD channels all the time, just not ones you get... And they are not jacking up the rates like cable... They have yearly price increase just like everyone else.. usually around 3 a package.. Cable around here just went up a minum $7 an account, plus more for HD boxes, etc... Directv hasn't ever done that, yet cable does yearly..



PennHORN said:


> I have 9 more months on my contract and would rather not switch but I would like for DirecTV to add some national HDs that most would consider to be valuable like Travel Channel HD and ESPNUHD.


I think we would all LOVE to see more national HD.. and as time goes by, we will see more...



PennHORN said:


> Raising prices on packages again and on PPVs now, especially in a tough economy, is not a good trend. I have not seen or heard of any improvement in customer service or installation since Liberty Media took over. I am disappointed that the PC tuner that they previewed at CES last year has been unceremoniously scrapped. Fundamental fixes STILL need to be made to the HR series. I just hope that DirecTV makes improvements this year. For the first time ever, I was jealous of my parent's Dish Network setup and that has never happened before.


Again, PPV is still cheaper on Directv than my other providers.. Except maybe Dish.. not sure what they are at.. (not counting their 1080P fees...)

Blame the pc card on microsoft... If Microsoft is involved, its generally there fault...

Whats wrong with your HR? I couldn't find any posts by you that showed you where having problems except for when Directv locked up everyones... in the last few months.

I for one think Direct has done a lot of great things this year, as they had in 2007, and I see them continuing that for at least the next 2 years... Not saying they can't do more, but they have yet to do anything to make me even think about actually leaving.. I know, I know, not everyones experience or needs are the same.. Which is why my point of view on this is completely valid...


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Blame the pc card on microsoft... If Microsoft is involved, its generally there fault...


This is absolutely wrong.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Ken S said:


> This is absolutely wrong.


Then why does everyone say vista is bad?

And where dose it say Directv pulled the plug for no reason? Why would they pull the plug on something if its development is coming along on schedule and looks promising. Microsoft was developing it, not Directv...


----------



## Juppers (Oct 26, 2006)

I agree with the OP. Being in the largest market without HD locals, or even an announcement on when they will be here, I haven't seen much good from DirecTV this year. People say their DVR has come along way, but it should have been this far along and much more before they even released it. They have ignored their highest paying regular package Premium customers this year, instead focusing only on sports and a random selection of local markets, while some cable companies, Dish, and other HD providers have caught up and surpassed their offerings. The new PPV time limit is a step in the wrong direction, as well as talking of any price increases for 2009. No ethically responsible company will be raising their service rates in the next year, which says alot about the direction of DirecTV.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Then why does everyone say vista is bad?


This is known as argumentum ad populum.



> And where dose it say Directv pulled the plug for no reason? Why would they pull the plug on something if its development is coming along on schedule and looks promising. Microsoft was developing it, not Directv...


I'm sure they had a reason.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Juppers said:


> I agree with the OP. Being in the largest market without HD locals, or even an announcement on when they will be here, I haven't seen much good from DirecTV this year. *People say their DVR has come along way, but it should have been this far along and much more before they even released it*. They have ignored their highest paying regular package Premium customers this year, instead focusing only on sports and a random selection of local markets, while some cable companies, Dish, and other HD providers have caught up and surpassed their offerings. The new PPV time limit is a step in the wrong direction, as well as talking of any price increases for 2009. No ethically responsible company will be raising their service rates in the next year, which says alot about the direction of DirecTV.


Couldn't have said it any better.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Blame the pc card on microsoft... If Microsoft is involved, its generally there fault...





Ken S said:


> This is absolutely wrong.


You would like to think this, wouldn't you .. My money is with inkahauts ..


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Juppers said:


> I agree with the OP. Being in the largest market without HD locals, or even an announcement on when they will be here, I haven't seen much good from DirecTV this year. People say their DVR has come along way, but it should have been this far along and much more before they even released it. They have ignored their highest paying regular package Premium customers this year, instead focusing only on sports and a random selection of local markets, while some cable companies, Dish, and other HD providers have caught up and surpassed their offerings. The new PPV time limit is a step in the wrong direction, as well as talking of any price increases for 2009. No ethically responsible company will be raising their service rates in the next year, which says alot about the direction of DirecTV.


As for releasing the HR2x too early .. no way .. sure, there was a rough patch early on, but I'd have much rather had that situation than waiting another year (or more) to put the product in my entertainment system .. so No, I do not think they should have waited.

To your other points, perhaps Sports > Premium in terms of revenue .. So in that regard I do not think they have ignored their highest paying customers. It's not like there are zero Premium channels which is what some folks make it out to be.

Additionally, local channels will drive subscriber increases in certain areas .. Also, it will help DIRECTV meet the mandated Digital Switchover in February which has taken a lot of resources over the last year.

DIRECTV not "ethical" for increasing prices next year? If you'd have said Scrooge, sure .. no one likes it when the price changes unless its' downward, but ethics are not involved here. DIRECTV is in business to make money and like any business will price their product at what they consider to be market rates .. then we (the market) decide whether or not we want to pay those rates.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> As for releasing the HR2x too early .. no way .. sure, there was a rough patch early on, but I'd have much rather had that situation than waiting another year (or more) to put the product in my entertainment system .. so No, I do not think they should have waited.


So they released a poorly put together product (by your own admission) that many customers found to be substandard...



> DIRECTV not "ethical" for increasing prices next year? If you'd have said Scrooge, sure .. no one likes it when the price changes unless its' downward, but ethics are not involved here. DIRECTV is in business to make money and like any business will price their product at what they consider to be market rates .. then we (the market) decide whether or not we want to pay those rates.


... but certainly that can't have anything to do with them needing to raise prices to increase revenue and profits, as opposed to... I dunno... having higher quality and customer satisfaction and garnering more revenue and profit by obtaining more customers...


----------



## thomas_d92 (Nov 29, 2004)

I just compared Dish HD to Directv HD at AVSforum. Dish still does not have the following: fuel, fx, foxnews, fox bn, ci, cmt,mtv, nick, speed , spike and vh1 and Directv does.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Ken S said:


> This is absolutely wrong.


Not sure who dropped the ball here, there is no where near enough information available to make the call.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> So they released a poorly put together product (by your own admission) that many customers found to be substandard...


No actually, I enjoyed my HR20-700 from day one and I have enjoyed the improvements since day one. But yes, I acknowledge that not everyone shared the same experience as I did over that time period.



prospero63 said:


> ... but certainly that can't have anything to do with them needing to raise prices to increase revenue and profits, as opposed to... I dunno... having higher quality and customer satisfaction and garnering more revenue and profit by obtaining more customers...


Call it what it is, but unethical? Perhaps you really meant unpopular or irresponsible.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

thomas_d92 said:


> I just compared Dish HD to Directv HD at AVSforum. Dish still does not have the following: fuel, fx, foxnews, fox bn, ci, cmt,mtv, nick, speed , spike and vh1 and Directv does.


Since you just did the comparison, what channels does DirecTV still not have?


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> No actually, I enjoyed my HR20-700 from day one and I have enjoyed the improvements since day one. But yes, I acknowledge that not everyone shared the same experience as I did over that time period.


Wait. You said "sure, there was a rough patch early on".



> Call it what it is, but unethical? Perhaps you really meant unpopular or irresponsible.


"that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions."

Personally, I do find that there is a wrongness or a badness of the motives of considering raising rates to maintain the same level of profits that have been impacted (apparently) by the loss of customers. IMO DirecTV has a choice. They can choose to make a superior product that people desire, or they can continue to make substandard products that people decide not to use. I'd rather them do the prior. I find that to be an infinitely more ethical way of conducting business.

Edit: Oh, and FWIW my personal choice of words to describe DirecTV's actions would be "stupid".


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> Since you just did the comparison, what channels does DirecTV still not have?


This is the chart that he's talking about:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1058081

And looking at the latest update date, it's pretty recent (the person who put this chart together has been updating it over time).


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> Wait. You said "sure, there was a rough patch early on".


Yes I did .. I enjoyed my HR20-700 from day one and I have enjoyed the improvements since day one. But yes, I acknowledge that not everyone shared the same experience as I did over that time period .. which is why I said rough patch. :shrug:



prospero63 said:


> Edit: Oh, and FWIW my personal choice of words to describe DirecTV's actions would be "stupid".


See, now that wasn't so hard .. that's exactly what I thought you were trying to say


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

In 2008 I got locals in HD for the Evansville In. market. Thank you DirecTV. As for ESPNU, I would love to have it, but it's no big deal. The Travel Channel HD, Whoop De Doo!!! There's more than I can watch and record now. For those that want the Travel Channel, hang in there. I'm sure it will be added SOON.


----------



## Juppers (Oct 26, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> To your other points, perhaps Sports > Premium in terms of revenue .. So in that regard I do not think they have ignored their highest paying customers. It's not like there are zero Premium channels which is what some folks make it out to be.


I said highest paying regular package customers, not total revenue customers.



> DIRECTV not "ethical" for increasing prices next year? If you'd have said Scrooge, sure .. no one likes it when the price changes unless its' downward, but ethics are not involved here. DIRECTV is in business to make money and like any business will price their product at what they consider to be market rates .. then we (the market) decide whether or not we want to pay those rates.


Ethical would be showing their customer base they understand financial times are difficult and freezing rates for a year. Profit isn't the only responsibilty a large corporation has. DirecTV's code of ethics is all about not lying to the SEC and conflicts of interest with it's employees. http://investor.directv.com/documentdisplay.cfm?DocumentID=3407 . On the other side, you have a company like Kellogg, who extends their ethic code to customers and the communities they do business in. http://www.kelloggcompany.com/social.aspx?id=62 . Heck, I can't even find DirecTV in the top 100 at http://www.business-ethics.com .


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Doug Brott said:


> You would like to think this, wouldn't you .. My money is with inkahauts ..


+1000


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

thomas_d92 said:


> I just compared Dish HD to Directv HD at AVSforum. Dish still does not have the following: fuel, fx, foxnews, fox bn, ci, cmt,mtv, nick, speed , spike and vh1 and Directv does.


Let's see, Fuel never shows HD, CMT, MTV and VH-1 never show HD (except for maybe an occasional awards show on MTV) so really, you can knock those off the list.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> No actually, I enjoyed my HR20-700 from day one and I have enjoyed the improvements since day one. But yes, I acknowledge that not everyone shared the same experience as I did over that time period.


I would like to point out that it was data gathering by people like Doug Brott that allowed the HR2x DVRs to improve so quickly. You can say, "coulda, shoulda, woulda" but the product went out the door and immediately there were helpful people like (short list from memory)

Earl Bonovich, Doug Brott, Tom Robertson, Donnie Byrd, mtnagel, Milominderbinder2, carl6, Canis Lupus, PoitNarf, litzdog911, Drew2k, hasan, coffey77, Spanky_Partain, Capmeister... and so many others...

that didn't sit back and complain. They stood up and did something. None of them got paid, none of them sat back and waited for fixes. They tracked bugs themselves, developed workarounds, and built a whole culture of helpful people here at DBSTalk into a force for good in the satellite community.

Again, "coulda, shoulda, woulda," in a perfect world every product would be perfect. But these people and hundreds of others did more than complain. They made a difference.

2006 was a better year because of them. 2007 and 2008 were too, and I'm sure that 2009 will be as well. You all have a great holiday now!


----------



## wilsonc (Aug 22, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Then why does everyone say vista is bad?


Vista isn't bad. It's the users who know nothing that say vista is bad.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

For my use, D*'s direction is just fine. My history is like Doug's: from day 1, my HR20-700 has been quite usable. It has been consistently enhanced over time, bugs have been fixed (and introduced, and fixed). With the addition of an HR21-200, HR20-100 and H21-200, my enjoyment continued throughout the year.

So, there are at least 3 of us that think the direction and progress has been just dandy. (and the only two large polls of user satisfaction taken about a year apart indicated that the vast majority (> 80%) are pleased with D*'s hardware offerings.)

There are plenty of things left to do, to be sure. So far, however, I couldn't disagree with the title of the thread more. 

The one thing I'm sure of is that things will continue to improve. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. The boxes have undergone continuous development, a pleasant contrast to my 5 other consumer electronics devices that were DOA (developmentally).

As is obvious by this thread, you can't please everyone, and some people can never be pleased, as it isn't in their nature. In balance, if the product is good, it will flourish. As far as I can see, both D*'s service and their hardware appear to be flourishing. In this instance, people are completely free to vote with their pocketbooks. 

I've been voting the same way since 1994.  

I dropped NFL ST this year. That's a pocketbook vote. (Too much money for what the product offered.) If they charge too much, I drop a service. If their overall services get to be too much and there is nothing more to drop, then I look for alternatives. 

My viewing habits are eclectic enough that having any particular channel or not having it in HD, is not going to move me. I have my preferences, but they don't rise to a "Jones". The general scheme of channels gives me what I have time to watch, and covers the spectrum of my interests. My boxes work very well and are continuing to improve. I'm not sure just what kind of a direction change would be needed (unless one considers phone support, which can be awful).

Does D* meet my every whim....hardly, but they meet enough of them to keep me writing a check....and smiling at the progress. They even created a "whim" for me recently, which was a pleasant surprise.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> Since you just did the comparison, what channels does DirecTV still not have?


Per the list that was quoted:
Hallmark
Lifetime
Lifetime Movie
Travel
WGN America
World Fishing
5StarMax
ActionMax
HBO 2
HBO Comedy
HBO Family
HBO Latino
HBO Signature
HBO Zone
Encore



thomas_d92 said:


> I just compared Dish HD to Directv HD at AVSforum. Dish still does not have the following: fuel, fx, foxnews, fox bn, ci, cmt,mtv, nick, speed , spike and vh1 and Directv does.


On MTV and VH1 combined, I've seen ONE show in hd (an MTV awards show) in the last year. I will admit that I may have missed one or two other hd shows but my question is still the same. Should we even count a channel as hd when we can pull up the guide at any time and see two weeks of sd shows on it but not a single show in hd?


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

TigersFanJJ said:


> On MTV and VH1 combined, I've seen ONE show in hd (an MTV awards show) in the last year. I will admit that I may have missed one or two other hd shows but my question is still the same. Should we even count a channel as hd when we can pull up the guide at any time and see two weeks of sd shows on it but not a single show in hd?


An HD channel broadcasting 4:3 SD is still much clearer than an SD channel broadcasting the same.

That doesn't excuse the lack of HD content, but I did want to point that out.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

Ken S said:


> This is absolutely wrong.


OK, there is something else to blame. Blame the fact that the market for the device was impossibly small compared to the support costs.


----------



## FranklyFred (Oct 4, 2006)

I think when Murdoch ran DTV he wanted to be the unquestioned leader in HD and satellite TV. Did not mind spending money to get there. Then he bailed out and sold to Liberty Media who are known as chiselers. There not going to spend anything if they can, just maximize profits, and try to grind the providers down to the last nickel.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

wilsonc said:


> Vista isn't bad. It's the users who know nothing that say vista is bad.


Vista is bad because the market decided it was bad. The objective ruling comes from adoption. Vista has underperformed drastically in licenses by Microsoft's repeated admission. Vista failed to convince people to upgrade. Vista failed miserably in convincing businesses to upgrade.

By the same objective measure, the HR2x series is a runaway success.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> that didn't sit back and complain. They stood up and did something. None of them got paid, none of them sat back and waited for fixes. They tracked bugs themselves, developed workarounds, and built a whole culture of helpful people here at DBSTalk into a force for good in the satellite community.
> 
> Again, "coulda, shoulda, woulda," in a perfect world every product would be perfect. But these people and hundreds of others did more than complain. They made a difference.


That's great, but frankly if it requires unpaid labor on the part of the consumer, if that's really what DirecTV's R&D model is based on, that may well be the most condemning statement about DirecTV. This isn't open source software. We're not sitting around as hobbiest's trying to help our little pet software project along. I'd wager many of us pay upwards of $100/month for COMMERCIAL software. We contribute to the profits of a $17.25 BILLION company that turned a net of $1.45 BILLION dollars last year. If in order to release a functional product DirecTV really relies on the free labor of their customers, then they should just make their product open source, which is to say 100% completely and utterly free.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

I too have had no significant issues with the HR2x series. It's on a UPS and the wiring is good. I've never had a missed recording that wasn't the fault of some bad data from the channel (including the 101 lately with the FNL episodes).

I remember when the HR10-250 was introduced. The problems at that time were showstoppers (like HDCP refusing to work).


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

prospero63 said:


> That's great, but frankly if it requires unpaid labor on the part of the consumer, if that's really what DirecTV's R&D model is based on, that may well be the most condemning statement about DirecTV. This isn't open source software. We're not sitting around as hobbiest's trying to help our little pet software project along. I'd wager many of us pay upwards of $100/month for COMMERCIAL software. We contribute to the profits of a $17.25 BILLION company that turned a net of $1.45 BILLION dollars last year. If in order to release a functional product DirecTV really relies on the free labor of their customers, then they should just make their product open source, which is to say 100% completely and utterly free.


Then blame Tivo for the same practice. Without the Tivo community, many of its products would have remained extremely buggy. The HR2x series doesn't have many direct competitors. You have to compare it to Tivo units, Dish DVRs and comparable cable boxes. Anyone that has ever expected a Scientific Atlanta HD DVR to function reliably would be ecstatic with the track record of the HR2x.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I think it's a mistake to say "DIRECTV's R&D model is based on." However, some people see a product that has potential, and work with other enthusiastic people to make it better for everyone. Some people prefer to remain dissatisfied without doing anything to make it better for themselves or anyone. 

In this world, I've found few things that work as advertised, even fewer that work to my complete satisfaction "out of the box", and very few companies with the humility to admit that the enthusiast community may have some good ideas on how to improve their product. 

I've only found one company that's reached out to its willing enthusiastic users and integrated their wishes and comprehensive testing in its rapid-deployment model. 

Again, "coulda shoulda woulda" but Mr. Prospero, you and I seem to have different ideas of how to improve our own experiences with technology, and whether or not we think it's worthwhile to improve the experiences for others.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

CorpITGuy said:


> An HD channel broadcasting 4:3 SD is still much clearer than an SD channel broadcasting the same.
> 
> That doesn't excuse the lack of HD content, but I did want to point that out.


No doubt it is better than what we get on the 101 but it's still sd.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

gregjones said:


> Then blame Tivo for the same practice. Without the Tivo community, many of its products would have remained extremely buggy. The HR2x series doesn't have many direct competitors. You have to compare it to Tivo units, Dish DVRs and comparable cable boxes. Anyone that has ever expected a Scientific Atlanta HD DVR to function reliably would be ecstatic with the track record of the HR2x.


In your last three posts you have managed to post an argumentum ad populum, a relativist fallacy and a variant of two wrongs make a right. In between you have dogged Microsoft under the same lines of logic that you dismiss any criticism of DirecTV. I'm sorry, but that comes across as homerism.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> .... and very few companies with the humility to admit that the enthusiast community may have some good ideas on how to improve their product.


Hear, hear! :righton:


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Again, "coulda shoulda woulda" but Mr. Prospero, you and I seem to have different ideas of how to improve our own experiences with technology, and whether or not we think it's worthwhile to improve the experiences for others.


Actually, where we have different ideas is that I find it insulting that a company I pay for a service, a company that see's and treats it's customers as "premium" folks they can charge top dollar for expects me (or anyone else) to do their R&D. What has been consistently ignored are my repeated (and accurate) points on DirecTV's net income and revenue relative to the apparent function of their R&D model. DirecTV could have absolutely invested better in R&D and it would have (unless completely mismanaged) improved their product far beyond what it is. But as customers too many of us make excuses and shoulder the responsibility that should rightly be DirecTV's, and consequently they have no reason to do more than achieve mediocrity.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I didn't expect DirecTV to continue the quick pace they did with D10 since they need to be careful what they add on D11 since that's all the bandwidth they have until D12 (which AFAIK still doesn't have a launch date).

I am disappointed that DirecTV did not follow through on what they announced in http://investor.directv.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=286351

_In addition to the HBO (East) HD channel it currently offers, DIRECTV will launch the following HBO/Cinemax channels in full-time HD: HBO West, HBO2 West, HBO2 East, HBO Family East, HBO Family West, HBO Latino, HBO Signature, Cinemax East, Cinemax West and MoreMax. The channels will begin rolling out in September and continue to launch through the rest of the year. DIRECTV currently carries each of these channels in standard-definition._

Yes, they did launch some of these but are still missing some. If you make an annocement that you're going to do something then you better at least follow through on it or put out another release saying when you will fulfill what you said to your customers.


----------



## johnck78 (Feb 19, 2007)

mystic7 said:


> Let's see, Fuel never shows HD, CMT, MTV and VH-1 never show HD (except for maybe an occasional awards show on MTV) so really, you can knock those off the list.


How is this DirecTv's fault? If the network chooses not to put HD on their HD channel blame the provider?

That's the same as ordering a XL Jacket from L.L. Bean and blaming UPS for delivering a Large, even though that's what L.L. Bean sent!

If DirecTv decided not to carry the HD CMT MTV, VH-1 and Fuel because they don't have HD content, and tomorrow they started to, you'd be complaining that they are not being carried. When the network start's broadcatsing, you'll be all set no waiting. This is exactly what happened with SPIKE. No HD for months, then (I forget exactly when) SPIKE started broadcasting HD content on their HD Channel.


----------



## knoxbh (May 1, 2002)

I am 84 yrs old (TODAY but that matters not here) and have been with Directv since 1995. True, there have some minor problems with the equipment and service but they have always solved them in time. Like anything else new, sometimes something goes wrong BUT THEY HAVE NEVER FAILED TO EVENTUALLY CORRECT IT. I remember having our first experience with TV in the Washington, DC area - 3 channels with snow with an antenna. Then, a local cable company laid down lines for 15 channels, WOW! Yes, there maybe a couple morechannels I would like to receive and they will probably pop up one of these days. However, there are more channels than I can possibly watch or record now. We have 3 DVRs (plus 5 other receivers) and there is always some on one or the other DVRs to watch. With all this said, may I suggest that those of you who are not satisfied with Directv that you go ahead right now and cancel the service - I know I would not put up watching something I was not happy with and agree you should not either. I think that Directv has done a great job since 1995 and improving all the time. And my thanks to all those on this forum who have contributed so much to the success of this service.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Then why does everyone say vista is bad?


Largely because it is bad.

Regardless of whether Vista is bad or not, it is what everyone must deal with and apparently DIRECTV has decided they're not up to the task at this time.


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

knoxbh said:


> I am 84 yrs old (TODAY but that matters not here) and have been with Directv since 1995. True, there have some minor problems with the equipment and service but they have always solved them in time. Like anything else new, sometimes something goes wrong BUT THEY HAVE NEVER FAILED TO EVENTUALLY CORRECT IT. I remember having our first experience with TV in the Washington, DC area - 3 channels with snow with an antenna. Then, a local cable company laid down lines for 15 channels, WOW! Yes, there maybe a couple morechannels I would like to receive and they will probably pop up one of these days. However, there are more channels than I can possibly watch or record now. We have 3 DVRs (plus 5 other receivers) and there is always some on one or the other DVRs to watch. With all this said, may I suggest that those of you who are not satisfied with Directv that you go ahead right now and cancel the service - I know I would not put up watching something I was not happy with and agree you should not either. I think that Directv has done a great job since 1995 and improving all the time. And my thanks to all those on this forum who have contributed so much to the success of this service.


Happy Birthday wishes. Well said, sir.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

knoxbh said:


> BUT THEY HAVE NEVER FAILED TO EVENTUALLY CORRECT IT.


May you live to see the remaining problems with the HR series corrected in such a manner that any previously "corrected" problems never return.

You need to update your tagline.


----------



## knoxbh (May 1, 2002)

Thanks. Don't know how to update my tagline!


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

knoxbh said:


> With all this said, may I suggest that those of you who are not satisfied with Directv that you go ahead right now and cancel the service - I know I would not put up watching something I was not happy with and agree you should not either.


That sounds great in principle but it overlooks contract's and equipment investments. Besides, I still standby one of my major themes. Rather than leaving DirecTV, their customers should demand better service, and DirecTV should provide it.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

prospero63 said:


> In your last three posts you have managed to post an argumentum ad populum, a relativist fallacy and a variant of two wrongs make a right. In between you have dogged Microsoft under the same lines of logic that you dismiss any criticism of DirecTV. I'm sorry, but that comes across as homerism.


You say argumentum ad populum, I say market pressure. Microsoft failed to make as much money with Vista as they had planned. I'm glad you know Latin terms, but you are not addressing the validity of the arguments.


----------



## knoxbh (May 1, 2002)

prospero63 said:


> That sounds great in principle but it overlooks contract's and equipment investments. Besides, I still standby one of my major themes. Rather than leaving DirecTV, their customers should demand better service, and DirecTV should provide it.


Personally I have better service and they are providing it to me every day. If you had been with them since 1995 as I have been, you would have seen the improvements they have made since then. As far as I am concerned, to Hell with the contracts and equipment investments, I would just go ahead and cancel what you consider to be bad service.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> Actually, where we have different ideas is that I find it insulting that a company I pay for a service, a company that see's and treats it's customers as "premium" folks they can charge top dollar for expects me (or anyone else) to do their R&D. What has been consistently ignored are my repeated (and accurate) points on DirecTV's net income and revenue relative to the apparent function of their R&D model. DirecTV could have absolutely invested better in R&D and it would have (unless completely mismanaged) improved their product far beyond what it is. But as customers too many of us make excuses and shoulder the responsibility that should rightly be DirecTV's, and consequently they have no reason to do more than achieve mediocrity.


Feel free to scream at the top of your lungs .. Will it matter? Probably not, but it might make you feel better. This is your choice.

My choice is and was to do what I can to speed things up and bring improvement as soon as possible .. it is my choice and you do not have my permission to choose for me.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

prospero63 said:


> That sounds great in principle but it overlooks contract's and equipment investments. Besides, I still standby one of my major themes. Rather than leaving DirecTV, their customers should demand better service, and DirecTV should provide it.


And a few of us have argued that sometimes you have to participate in your own salvation. If helping point out an issue with the HR2x leads to its resolution, it is a good thing. If you have an idea to make your favorite provider's product better, participation in the development of it helps them provide you with improved services.

Some here are arguing that contributing to the concept and implementation of new software is a bad thing or that DirecTV is off-loading that responsibility onto unwilling customers. Many of us feel more loyalty to DirecTV precisely because they open up the process to a degree and show us where they are headed.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

gregjones said:


> You say argumentum ad populum, I say market pressure. Microsoft failed to make as much money with Vista as they had planned. I'm glad you know Latin terms, but you are not addressing the validity of the arguments.


That's because, as logical fallacies, they have no validity. "Because a lot of people believe it" doesn't make something valid.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

knoxbh said:


> I am 84 yrs old (TODAY but that matters not here) and have been with Directv since 1995.


Happy Birthday! and Happy Holidays!


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

knoxbh said:


> Personally I have better service and they are providing it to me every day. If you had been with them since 1995 as I have been, you would have seen the improvements they have made since then. As far as I am concerned, to Hell with the contracts and equipment investments, I would just go ahead and cancel what you consider to be bad service.


I would agree that for 6-7 of the last 8 years they made progress. I think in the last 1-2 years though, they back slid.

I try not to throw money away like that personally. Beside, just because I think they can (and should) improve doesn't mean that I don't want the service. The two positions aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

prospero63 said:


> That's because, as logical fallacies, they have no validity. "Because a lot of people believe it" doesn't make something valid.


I have attempted to reason with you. I have provided comparisons to similar products. You can accept or reject them, but that does not make them less true.

Financially, Vista has been a failure for Microsoft. This has been stated by a definitive source: Microsoft. This assertion is now supported by Microsoft's current PR campaign outlining their attempt to overcome the negative consumer opinion of Vista.

Financially, the HR2x series is a success for DirecTV. The subscriber numbers for the series far eclipse those of previous HD DVRs (HR10-250) both in terms of raw numbers and percentage of total subscribers. This data has been relayed in quarterly financial calls over the last several years, all of which were documented extensively on this very site.

Furthermore, argumentum ad populum is not a fallacy at all for a public company. The mass perception of DirecTV impacts its stock price and its ability to provide shareholder value. Companies that strenuously avoid positive public perception dissolve.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

gregjones said:


> And a few of us have argued that sometimes you have to participate in your own salvation. If helping point out an issue with the HR2x leads to its resolution, it is a good thing. If you have an idea to make your favorite provider's product better, participation in the development of it helps them provide you with improved services.


Frankly, I haven't seen any real participation. It is, at best, unidirectional.



> Some here are arguing that contributing to the concept and implementation of new software is a bad thing or that DirecTV is off-loading that responsibility onto unwilling customers. Many of us feel more loyalty to DirecTV precisely because they open up the process to a degree and show us where they are headed.


I never said unwilling. Willing or not, as a company that netted $1.45 BILLION and doesn't, that I can find, publish their R&D investment (if you accept their financials at face value, they spend ZERO on R&D), their product quality shouldn't rely on customer contributions to the level that it apparently does (and frankly falls short of most accepted quality measurement practices).

With regards to opening the process, I guess I'm not one of the cool kids, 'cause I haven't seen a single iota of openness from DirecTV. I see a lot of people posting on the forum, but how much actually makes it to DirecTV I don't know. From observing though, I have to believe it's not much. I mean, I have seen features mentioned for years that aren't implemented and have no timetable beyond "it's coming really soon". I only know of one software company that is so vague with their roadmaps, and that's VMware. And they are getting ready to be in a dogfight with their competitors partly as a result. Paying customers just don't like hearing stuff like that. They want to know you have a plan, what it is, when it's scheduled and then they want to see that you are meeting your deadlines. Vague "it's really close" and "trust us, you'll really like it a lot"... well to use an expression, that dog don't hunt.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

gregjones said:


> I have attempted to reason with you.


An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so."

I'm sorry, but presenting logical fallacies isn't reasoning.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Then why does everyone say vista is bad?
> 
> And where dose it say Directv pulled the plug for no reason? Why would they pull the plug on something if its development is coming along on schedule and looks promising. Microsoft was developing it, not Directv...


No, DirecTV was developing the HDPC 20 and their team missed the VMC update and DirecTV pulled the plug on development. Read the press release for yourself. If the device was ready DirecTV could have very easily written a driver themselves...or had someone like Cyberlink do it for them. The hardware wasn't ready AND DirecTV didn't want to dedicate any more resources to the project. Please stop with the Microsoft killed the project...this was a DirecTV project all the way which required some Microsoft support much like every other piece of hardware that runs on Windows/MC, etc.

Everyone says Vista is bad? I think you've been watching too many commercials. We have Vista running here without issue. Is it a spectacular upgrade from XP...no...not for our needs but it has been stable and works. Much the same as the MacOS upgrades that have come since 10 was released.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Ken S said:


> No, DirecTV was developing the HDPC 20 and their team missed the VMC update and DirecTV pulled the plug on development. *Read the press release for yourself.*


Easy now. This is no time for facts. We want to believe that someone other than DirecTV failed. 

(on a side note, anyone remember the old Metallica "beer good" spoofs? Sometimes I feel like "microsoft bad") :lol:


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> I see a lot of people posting on the forum, but how much actually makes it to DirecTV I don't know. From observing though, I have to believe it's not much.


Check out this page .. Note the gray/white section at the bottom of the page as these are items that DIRECTV has implemented after we have suggested them.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Ken S said:


> No, DirecTV was developing the HDPC 20 and their team missed the VMC update and DirecTV pulled the plug on development. Read the press release for yourself. If the device was ready DirecTV could have very easily written a driver themselves...or had someone like Cyberlink do it for them. The hardware wasn't ready AND DirecTV didn't want to dedicate any more resources to the project. Please stop with the Microsoft killed the project...this was a DirecTV project all the way which required some Microsoft support much like every other piece of hardware that runs on Windows/MC, etc.


Ken, all I can say is that you have your facts wrong ..


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> Frankly, I haven't seen any real participation. It is, at best, unidirectional.


If you search out the HR2x wish list, or the release notes for any software for the HR2x, you'll find the results of two-way participation.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

prospero63 said:


> An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so."
> 
> I'm sorry, but presenting logical fallacies isn't reasoning.


Well, enjoy the logical reasoning that provides no useful product whatsoever. I have engaged in the most notable fallacy: talking to someone that would rather argue semantics than learn.

I have achieved 100% apathy on this thread and will now depart.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

gregjones said:


> Vista is bad because the market decided it was bad. The objective ruling comes from adoption. Vista has underperformed drastically in licenses by Microsoft's repeated admission. Vista failed to convince people to upgrade. Vista failed miserably in convincing businesses to upgrade.
> 
> By the same objective measure, the HR2x series is a runaway success.


Wanna bet on whether Vista or the HR10 has had more upgrades? Also, the HR10 upgrade was basically forced and in many cases given for little or no charge. It's not a valid comparison...but I'm sure you're pretty well aware of that.

Vista's failure rests not in its own performance but in its inability to be significantly better than Windows XP for the majority of customer's needs. That doesn't make the underlying technology bad...it's actually better in many ways. As I said previously, fortunately unlike DirecTV Microsoft did not stop support of XP and force the upgrade.

If we're going to use overall sales figures as the definitive guide to what's good and what's bad...then cable TV is far, far better than DirecTV because many, many more people choose cable. I wonder if there's any single DMA where DirecTV has more customers than its cable competition?

However, all of this has little to do with the implication that Microsoft had somehow caused DirecTV to shelve the HDPC-20 project.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> Ken, all I can say is that you have your facts wrong ..


Doug,

All I can say...is I think you may have your facts wrong...or perhaps we're both hearing different stories from different sides. In the end though it was DirecTV that cancelled the project.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> Check out this page .. Note the gray/white section at the bottom of the page as these are items that DIRECTV has implemented after we have suggested them.


That site has never made much sense to me. For example, am I to read it that MRV and DLB are ranked behind (I stopped counting) at 44 items? What is the ranking of the product requirements? Based on the rankings, what has been done and how long did it take to do it? For example, when I look at the gray/white section I don't see anything I think would qualify as new features. They are enhancements or improvements to existing features. Now, don't get me wrong, but that's a dramatically different category of development than providing new features.

Then you have things like eSATA (OK, it's a new feature... kind of... read on...). So they turned the port on, but completely don't support it. That's hardly what I would qualify as a successful implementation. It doesn't meet even the most rudimentary of development process definition.

Finally you have things like "make caller ID work reliably". Really? Really, their customer base had to actually provide a requirement like that??!? If DirecTV was really focused on quality wouldn't that be something that is an implied requirement of a piece of functionality to begin with?

I do want to clarify something though. I'm not minimizing the effort that folks in the "community" put into things. To the contrary, I commend it. However, DirecTV shouldn't need that to the degree that they seem to. They should have PM's that are building lists like that WITHOUT the need of the customer base being so frustrated that they feel the need to build and maintain something to that level. My point is I don't want anyone to confuse my criticism of DirecTV as a criticism of their attempts to improve DirecTV's products. My criticism is squarely and exclusively directed at DirecTV.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

Ken S said:


> If we're going to use overall sales figures as the definitive guide to what's good and what's bad...then cable TV is far, far better than DirecTV because many, many more people choose cable. I wonder if there's any single DMA where DirecTV has more customers than its cable competition?


No. I am judging success by the peak of HR10's as a percentage of all DirecTV receivers versus the current percentage of HR2x's as a percentage of all DirecTV receivers. I am not comparing them to cable at all. For Microsoft I am comparing the percentage of people that upgraded to Vista to the number that upgraded to XP. For both cases it is a matter of looking at the adoption rate.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> I'm not minimizing the effort that folks in the "community" put into things.


Actually, you are so I'm bowing out now .. Cheers and Happy Holidays.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

knoxbh said:


> Thanks. Don't know how to update my tagline!


Click on "User CP" near the top of the page and then choose 'Edit Signature".


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> That site has never made much sense to me. For example, am I to read it that MRV and DLB are ranked behind (I stopped counting) at 44 items? What is the ranking of the product requirements? Based on the rankings, what has been done and how long did it take to do it? For example, when I look at the gray/white section I don't see anything I think would qualify as new features. They are enhancements or improvements to existing features. Now, don't get me wrong, but that's a dramatically different category of development than providing new features.


Mr. Prospero, you might wish to send a private message to "Steve" who runs the HR2x Wish List.

I do apologize that the site does not make sense to you, but more importantly, a look at the lower portion of it will reveal items (with a grey background) that have been implemented by DIRECTV at our request. Please let me know if there is any confusion on how to interpret those items and I'll try to help.


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> Actually, you are so I'm bowing out now .. Cheers and Happy Holidays.


I don't think you can find me critical of the efforts people have put forth, rather I have been critical of the seeming need for community testing in lieu of internal product testing and my observation of limited DirecTV adoption and reciprocation of the efforts. In all my posts that I can think of, I have continued to focus exclusively on DirecTV's failures and criticisms. Even where I might have cited something from the wishlist for example, it was to illustrate a deficiency of DirecTV, not the community.

For all the user community efforts, is there someone who operates in an official capacity with DirecTV that participates? Maybe there is, but I can't seem to identify them. By all appearances it's a grass roots effort, and I just don't think billion dollar companies should need that kind of effort for the successful development of their products. I mean my experience with grass roots movements is that they are typically born of a tremendous frustration with the actions and efforts of whatever "power group" they are addressing.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

johnck78 said:


> How is this DirecTv's fault? If the network chooses not to put HD on their HD channel blame the provider?
> 
> That's the same as ordering a XL Jacket from L.L. Bean and blaming UPS for delivering a Large, even though that's what L.L. Bean sent!


Not the same thing at all. Directv makes claims that it is HD. All UPS is claiming is that you will receive what was shipped from L.L. Bean.



johnck78 said:


> If DirecTv decided not to carry the HD CMT MTV, VH-1 and Fuel because they don't have HD content, and tomorrow they started to, you'd be complaining that they are not being carried.


That's a big if. My bet is it won't happen tomorrow or any time soon.



johnck78 said:


> When the network start's broadcatsing, you'll be all set no waiting.


It may show up right away but that doesn't change the fact that some have been waiting for a year or so to see the HD that Directv claims to have on these channels.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

prospero63 said:


> For all the user community efforts, is there someone who operates in an official capacity with DirecTV that participates?


I'm not sure what answer you want to get here.

Let me give you two hypothetical statements:

If I told you that there were over a dozen people at DIRECTV who monitored and participated by proxy here at DBSTalk, and that such people chose to operate silently so as not to be overwhelmed by requests... I suspect you'd blame DIRECTV for making an enthusiast community an "official" part of their R&D.

If I told you that DIRECTV policy was not to allow forum participation, I suspect you'd accuse them of ignoring an important voice for improvement.

So, which answer would make you happier?


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Mr. Prospero,


It's actually Wes. No need for such formalities. 



> you might wish to send a private message to "Steve" who runs the HR2x Wish List.


OK, I saw Doug's name on the bottom of the page and figured he ran it. I'll do that. :goodjob:



> I do apologize that the site does not make sense to you, but more importantly, a look at the lower portion of it will reveal items (with a grey background) that have been implemented by DIRECTV at our request. Please let me know if there is any confusion on how to interpret those items and I'll try to help.


No worries. I want to try to clarify again, I am not saying that the efforts of the community to drive the improvements are bad. I'm not criticizing anyone who has invested the time, effort and care to do that. My criticism is simply that DirecTV shouldn't need something of this manner. Maybe it's just because I live in an R&D environment, but a lot of the items that I see listed (completed or otherwise) I find myself questioning how in the world DirecTV could not know this internally and have a group of PM's going out and building requirements, defining PRD's, etc. Now, I don't expect DirecTV to necessarily know everything. To build any product you have to have some mechanism to obtain customer feedback, etc. But when I look at how DirecTV seems to operate, they go beyond that in terms of seeming to need the user community to drive things. It should be the opposite. The user community should be providing input and DirecTV should be driving it. I just don't see them doing that. It's more like they are running an open source initiative where the community is building it... but with none of the full disclosure that comes with such a project. I just have better expectations of a company the size of DirecTV.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

prospero63 said:


> Since you just did the comparison, what channels does DirecTV still not have?


Heres a good list of what both D* and E* offer and what they don't. Scroll to the bottom to see what they don't have in HD. Thank you James Long.

Overall I'm very happy with D*. They bring me more sports in HD then any other provider. They've been busy adding HD locals + HD PBS. I think (hope) we'll see more national HD in 2009.



knoxbh said:


> I am 84 yrs old (TODAY but that matters not here) and have been with Directv since 1995.


 :balloons: :hb:


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

I love Direct TV and my HD DVR. 1000X better on both compared to time warner here. My Only complaint about the HD DVR was there seemed to be too much focus on squeezing all of these extra features out of it then making it quick and stable first.

That and Vista is fine. Everyone whined just as much when XP came out


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I'm not sure what answer you want to get here.


I want the truth, nothing more sinister than that.



> Let me give you two hypothetical statements:
> 
> If I told you that there were over a dozen people at DIRECTV who monitored and participated by proxy here at DBSTalk, and that such people chose to operate silently so as not to be overwhelmed by requests... I suspect you'd blame DIRECTV for making an enthusiast community an "official" part of their R&D.


Actually, I wouldn't. I think that folks have taken my criticism of DirecTV to mean that I think making an enthusiast community an "official" part of their R&D is a bad thing. Well, remove "official" and actually it's a good thing. A very good thing. Now obviously DirecTV would need to be mindful of the fact that it's an enthusiast community and thus take some things "with a grain of salt", but the bottom line is no, I most certain do NOT think that soliciting feedback from an enthusiast community is a bad thing.

Now, I think it's unfortunate that they have to operate by proxy, but probably not for the reasons you think I do. For me, I think that it's such a community that DirecTV should be willing to have a PM's who's role is largely being that "not silent" interface. In short, they should invest the money to have someone in an official capacity.



> If I told you that DIRECTV policy was not to allow forum participation, I suspect you'd accuse them of ignoring an important voice for improvement.


No, but I would say that it's another example of my opinion that DirecTV does not treat customer satisfaction as one of the, if not the, most important measurements of their success. It illustrates an incredibly closed minded and... not sure the word I'm looking for... dictatorial? Obtuse? Fiddling while the Titanic sinks? Living in their white tower? Telling the peons they can eat cake? methodology, one which has been proven over and over in company after company to be an incredibly inefficient manner of development.



> So, which answer would make you happier?


Neither. Either. Or both. I'm more interested in the truth than personal happiness.

You know what I would really make me happy though? Hearing that, for example, DirecTV is working on adopting an agile development methodology to close the gaps between features and time to market, while improving the overall stability and functionality of their systems. I gotta admit, that would make me pretty happy.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Ken S said:


> Doug,
> 
> All I can say...is I think you may have your facts wrong...or perhaps we're both hearing different stories from different sides. In the end though it was DirecTV that cancelled the project.


If you are referring to the hardware, it was ready for the testing. We've seen pix at http://www.engadgethd.com/. You are wise enough to know the HDPC-20 hardware is pretty trivial as it is a standard HD receiver with USB outputs and no video out. And the firmware is fairly simple in many ways.

If you are referring to the software...wait, what software? DIRECTV outsourced that to Microsoft. Had the timing worked, it would have been a win-win for both companies.

Yes, DIRECTV cancelled _their_ product. Microsoft doesn't cancel DIRECTV products, that wouldn't make sense. 

But any outsource solution can screw up or delay a product to the point it is no longer viable... (Note this is in theory, I am not sure who within DIRECTV pulled the plug nor why.)

(Which actually equally applies to another false notion you have regarding Tivo taking over the entire development process for DIRECTV. DIRECTV has outsourced DVR software several times, none has been as successful as doing their own.)

Merry Christmas,
Tom


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> DIRECTV has outsourced DVR software several times, none has been as successful as doing their own.


That's somewhat self-fulfilling on their part though, isn't it? As I recall, their outsourced software (in the case of TIVO) started to fall behind where the rest of the technology was going, it became clear that DirecTV was abandoning it and thus there was no reason for people to continue to desire it (thus improving the measurement of success, namely adoption rate), but rather to go with DirecTV. A huge outside catalyst for this was the implementation of HD. IMO the ability to get ALL the HD channels DirecTV offers did more to drive their internal software than any other single thing. It followed that people wanted HD, and DirecTV had the software to offer it.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

I suppose that at some point it became self-fulfilling, but contend that the unsuccessful part came first.

I also point out how long it took Tivo to have their already existing software base ported for the cable companies.

Merry Christmas!
Tom


----------



## prospero63 (Aug 31, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> I also point out how long it took Tivo to have their already existing software base ported for the cable companies.


No doubt, though the whole cable-card fiasco didn't help much there. Definitely though, TIVO shot themselves in the foot on that one IMO.


----------



## knoxbh (May 1, 2002)

Thanks for the info. On my way to correct it. By the way, my poor wife of 33 years is fearful because my Mother lived to 104 and her Mother lived to 100 - told her not to spend in insurance just yet!


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> If you are referring to the hardware, it was ready for the testing. We've seen pix at http://www.engadgethd.com/. You are wise enough to know the HDPC-20 hardware is pretty trivial as it is a standard HD receiver with USB outputs and no video out. And the firmware is fairly simple in many ways.
> 
> If you are referring to the software...wait, what software? DIRECTV outsourced that to Microsoft. Had the timing worked, it would have been a win-win for both companies.
> 
> ...


Tom,

If we're going to start attacking "supposed" false notions that I didn't bring up in this thread. Please don't forget to bring up you and Doug's (and other hosts here) numerous incorrect statements in the past about their never being another DirecTivo. I haven't mentioned Tivo in this thread and don't believe they have anything to do with the HDPC-20.

If DirecTV believed the HDPC-20 was going to be a profitable device they would have made sure it was released...it's their product and their service. There wasn't a lot of desire on the part of DirecTV to get the product out and the size of the market for it made it pretty meaningless to Microsoft. So, it went to the bottom of the dev pile at both companies (you know kind of like products like Channels I Get). The DirecTV Microsoft relationship was much stronger several years back...people/owners change.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Gee...I wonder if its really all about having a Top 10 list of priorities....and perhaps some of those don't match up perfectly to the personal preferences of some posters here. :grin: 

After all...we do live in a "it's all about me" world....  

The Mods here explain what is going on - they are not responsible for it.

As for the HDPC-20....there were never any guarantees it would see the light of day - it was an alpha/beta test product.....:nono2: 

I prefer to live in the present and look forward to the future, as opposed to living in the past and constantly grumbling about things that were not perfect to my liking nor things I can change.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Gee...I wonder if its really all about having a Top 10 list of priorities....and perhaps some of those don't match up perfectly to the personal preferences of some posters here. :grin:
> 
> After all...we do live in a "it's all about me" world....
> 
> ...


Well, they did show the product at CES as a product that was coming...so I think some folk's assumptions weren't that absurd. Certainly, it's not that unusual for an announced product to disappear into the nether at either Microsoft or DirecTV.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Ken S said:


> Well, they did show the product at CES as a product that was coming...so I think some folk's assumptions weren't that absurd. Certainly, it's not that unusual for an announced product to disappear into the nether at either Microsoft or DirecTV.


True on both counts.

That said...if it was lower on the priority list, then postponing it wouldn't be all that shocking.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Ken S said:


> Tom,
> 
> If we're going to start attacking "supposed" false notions that I didn't bring up in this thread. Please don't forget to bring up you and Doug's (and other hosts here) numerous incorrect statements in the past about their never being another DirecTivo. I haven't mentioned Tivo in this thread and don't believe they have anything to do with the HDPC-20.
> 
> If DirecTV believed the HDPC-20 was going to be a profitable device they would have made sure it was released...it's their product and their service. There wasn't a lot of desire on the part of DirecTV to get the product out and the size of the market for it made it pretty meaningless to Microsoft. So, it went to the bottom of the dev pile at both companies (you know kind of like products like Channels I Get). The DirecTV Microsoft relationship was much stronger several years back...people/owners change.


Do you believe that DirecTV under Rupert Murdoch(NewsCorp) would have ever signed another agreement with Tivo?.I don't believe so,and that's when these statements you bring up were made.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Jhon69 said:


> Do you believe that DirecTV under Rupert Murdoch(NewsCorp) would have ever signed another agreement with Tivo?.I don't believe so,and that's when these statements you bring up were made.


Murdoch had DirecTV up for sale for quite some time. Once again why are we talking about Tivo in relation to my posts? I didn't bring them up in this thread. I was under the impression that discussion of DirecTivo products was limited to the thread in the DVR section...that's what some mods have stated at least.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Agree.:backtotop


----------



## Incog-Neato (Apr 21, 2006)

Where did you get your "most" statistics for those 2 channels?


PennHORN said:


> I would like for DirecTV to add some national HDs that most would consider to be valuable like Travel Channel HD and ESPNUHD.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

Incog-Neato said:


> Where did you get your "most" statistics for those 2 channels?


Probably from the many threads and posts that ask if & when those channels are coming. I wouldn't really watch either of those but I do see that they are valuable channels.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Ken S said:


> Tom,
> 
> If we're going to start attacking "supposed" false notions that I didn't bring up in this thread. Please don't forget to bring up you and Doug's (and other hosts here) numerous incorrect statements in the past about their never being another DirecTivo. I haven't mentioned Tivo in this thread and don't believe they have anything to do with the HDPC-20.
> 
> If DirecTV believed the HDPC-20 was going to be a profitable device they would have made sure it was released...it's their product and their service. There wasn't a lot of desire on the part of DirecTV to get the product out and the size of the market for it made it pretty meaningless to Microsoft. So, it went to the bottom of the dev pile at both companies (you know kind of like products like Channels I Get). The DirecTV Microsoft relationship was much stronger several years back...people/owners change.


Right now the new directvivo is in the same state as the HDPC-20 was prior to cancelation - vaporware, at least there was a box to see for the HDPC-20, have not seen anything on the directivo. No one knows the future, there are numerous branches that can be taken, in someones future timeline the directivo makes it, in another alternate reality it ends up sharing a bed with the HDPC-20. Never count your vaporware products until they are on the market and available.

If it does comes out, fine will make some people happy 
If it doesn't come out, fine, will make some people happy also

Don't have a crystal ball that reads past the next few minutes when I know I will submit this post and get up and pour a nice glass of aged single malt scotch and call a friend of mine in Dublin and wish her a Merry Christmas


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

TigersFanJJ said:


> Not the same thing at all. Directv makes claims that it is HD. All UPS is claiming is that you will receive what was shipped from L.L. Bean.


DirecTV doesn't make any claims that it is HD. They simply pass on the MTVHD channel that MTV gives them. DirecTV says "We offer MTVHD" and that claim is 100% valid. DirecTV says nothing about the amount of HD content on any channel.


----------



## gquiring (Jan 8, 2006)

I am very happy with D* as for their DVR offerings. I think the HR2x series is hot stuff. I owned Replay, Tivo and the HR20/22. I still say Tivo was the poorest of the three.

I was less than happy with the idiot installer who left with a signal strength of 60 on the 99 band but that was resolved with my friend helping out. When my HR20 phoned home signaling a SOS D* promptly called me and replaced it with a HR22 which has been almost flawless (only gripe is slow response from the remote).

But their HD premium offerings (HBO for example) is a big letdown. I always feel D* focuses too much on their sports customers. For example remember a while back when they knocked HD TNT down for football on many weekends. That was going too far.

FIOS is available in my area for about a year now. I am still a year to go on my D* commitment. So they have a year to play catch up. My only gripe with any sat company is the rain fade. Since installing the new dish I find it is way more picky. I get 95+ on all bands but I still loose my signal on any heavy rain storm.

So bottom line I will go where the HD is. But I do have patience. I won't jump just because someone else has a few month lead. That's just plain silly in my book. Competition is good and I thank Verizon for stepping into the mix. It keeps everyone on their toes.

Merry Christmas!
Gary


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

gquiring said:


> I always feel D* focuses too much on their sports customers. For example remember a while back when they knocked HD TNT down for football on many weekends. That was going too far.


Someone had to lose, and DirecTV picked the people who pay $10/month versus the people who pay $90/month. They made the right move.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> Not sure who dropped the ball here, there is no where near enough information available to make the call.





prospero63 said:


> This is known as argumentum ad populum.


I was being a bit sarcastic... Here is reality.. I am running Vista Ultimate on a laptop that came out 3 years before vista, and a desktop on a computer that came out 4 years before Vista, and I have almost no issues at all these days. Its actually more stable now than XP was on these machines that where designed for XP...

Vista is a looser in terms of acceptance, but not in terms of quality, any more or less so than XP, from my personal experience... I really don't know what so many people complain about, other than when it first hit, many drivers seemed to be missing..

With that said.. There are 2 companies (Microsoft and Sony), that if they are involved, I'm sorry, until someone proves its not there fault, in my experience it is safe to assume it is, and when I have a little info that backs it up, it become even more plausable.. The reasoning is simple.. They are arrogant companies. They believe what ever they do should be considered the beast of the best, and they lack some of the humility that a good company has and they don't double check what they are doing some times.. Sony makes, at best, average tv's... I'm not really talking about picture quality. Thats in the eye of the beholder... I'm talking more about the % of people that have issues with them vs. other manufactures. I know some will disagree, but I have seen the number of service requests for tv's from many brands, and Sony was consistantly one of the most need in service, as a percentage, not just volume... Microsoft has this issue in a different way. They believe if they build it, it is the best, and they are infalable... They don't cross their i's and dot their t's. If they did, they would have had a much better launch for Vista and would have conivinced people to upgrade...

With that said, Microsoft was conductying the trials and working on the software.. the hardware exsisted and was in their hands... So that points a lot of fingers at microsoft for not hitting deadlines, or not getting it to work in general. Prove it otherwise, and I'll believe you. Till then.. sorry, don't buy it.

ALSO with that said... I believe the entire OP post is a product of argumentum ad populum resulting from a few people on this forum board, and is not at all representative of the actual perception of Directv to the general Directv customer. Its a total falsehood that Directv has taken any steps backward, or not added huge amounts to their service this year. Its all his perception. I defy anyone to show me actual proof.



Juppers said:


> I said highest paying regular package customers, not total revenue customers.
> 
> Ethical would be showing their customer base they understand financial times are difficult and freezing rates for a year. Profit isn't the only responsibilty a large corporation has. DirecTV's code of ethics is all about not lying to the SEC and conflicts of interest with it's employees. http://investor.directv.com/documentdisplay.cfm?DocumentID=3407 . On the other side, you have a company like Kellogg, who extends their ethic code to customers and the communities they do business in. http://www.kelloggcompany.com/social.aspx?id=62 . Heck, I can't even find DirecTV in the top 100 at http://www.business-ethics.com .





wilsonc said:


> Vista isn't bad. It's the users who know nothing that say vista is bad.


Directv is a company. There number one ethical duty is to make money. Period. Their raising of rates is not unethical in any way shape or form. There is nothing written or even heard of in ethics that says you should not continue to try and make more money because it may not be the best thing for EVERY customer. Thats very different than the collusion and gouging that the oil industry worked on the world over the last year.. and in the long run, they are really going to pay for it...



gregjones said:


> OK, there is something else to blame. Blame the fact that the market for the device was impossibly small compared to the support costs.


Thats absolutely possible too. Of course, that would suggest a shared fault in its demise.. so I doubt anyone would accept that.



gregjones said:


> Vista is bad because the market decided it was bad. The objective ruling comes from adoption. Vista has underperformed drastically in licenses by Microsoft's repeated admission. Vista failed to convince people to upgrade. Vista failed miserably in convincing businesses to upgrade.
> 
> By the same objective measure, the HR2x series is a runaway success.


Thats true, but I think the point was that Vista is not actually bad at performance of what its supposed to do on a computer, but how accepted it has been. Very different....



prospero63 said:


> That's great, but frankly if it requires unpaid labor on the part of the consumer, if that's really what DirecTV's R&D model is based on, that may well be the most condemning statement about DirecTV. This isn't open source software. We're not sitting around as hobbiest's trying to help our little pet software project along. I'd wager many of us pay upwards of $100/month for COMMERCIAL software. We contribute to the profits of a $17.25 BILLION company that turned a net of $1.45 BILLION dollars last year. If in order to release a functional product DirecTV really relies on the free labor of their customers, then they should just make their product open source, which is to say 100% completely and utterly free.


Directvs R&D model is not in any way based on the ce program here. You are naive to think or even suggest such a thing. The only thing the CE process has done for them is allowed them to test software in a few more situations before unleashing it to the masses,it helps them speed up the process, and it allows their customers to provide more than just a feedback card you drop in the mail when it comes to requests for features. Believe me, while a few of the things they have added are in direct response to our feedback here, most of the features they have added where on the board to be added with or without us. Their speed and specifics in function may have been affected by the feedback here, but not the overall direction.

In order for $100 a month of my bill to go to software development, I'd have to have over 20 receivers in my house...

Less than 10% profit isn't much for stockholders...

And you have no idea how much Directv spends on R&D. For you to speculate if they do or do not spend enough is ridiculous. And to say they obviously don't, or at least imply that because of the exsistance of the CE program shows your lack of outside the box thinking that companies should be fostering to provide better services for their custoemrs in the long run. If anything, the CE program may have convinced them to spend more on R&D.

The software they are creating today will be the backbone and foundation for all their future DVRs in terms of functionality....



prospero63 said:


> Actually, where we have different ideas is that I find it insulting that a company I pay for a service, a company that see's and treats it's customers as "premium" folks they can charge top dollar for expects me (or anyone else) to do their R&D. What has been consistently ignored are my repeated (and accurate) points on DirecTV's net income and revenue relative to the apparent function of their R&D model. DirecTV could have absolutely invested better in R&D and it would have (unless completely mismanaged) improved their product far beyond what it is. But as customers too many of us make excuses and shoulder the responsibility that should rightly be DirecTV's, and consequently they have no reason to do more than achieve mediocrity.


Again, they don't expect this at all. Your on another planet if thats what you think. No company actually works that way. They have figured out though, that if they allow some users to try things out and give them feedback, they may learn more about possible issues that may come up in systems that they can't readily recreate at their place. There are way to many variables in the installs from all their customers to take everything into account at just their headquarters. And sense an opportunity to get some additional feedback appeared before their eyes, they took it. How on earth could that be insulting? Thinking outside the box to try and create a more stable, and feature rich system... There are a lot of companies that need to try that.

The auto industry would be in much better shape if they where to take a page out of Directv's book right now and listen to and solicit more info from their customers like Directv is doing with the ce program.


----------



## gquiring (Jan 8, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> Someone had to lose, and DirecTV picked the people who pay $10/month versus the people who pay $90/month. They made the right move.


Really so my D* bill is $10 month? Try $130.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

gquiring said:


> Really so my D* bill is $10 month? Try $130.


You pay $10/month for HD Access, NFLST+SF subscribers pay $90/month for their package.


----------



## gquiring (Jan 8, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> You pay $10/month for HD Access, NFLST+SF subscribers pay $90/month for their package.


Ok I get it, but it was not right to yank a channel that is paid for. I am sure you would not want a football game yanked if some other group paid more for their package.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

gquiring said:


> Ok I get it, but it was not right to yank a channel that is paid for.


I understand that. But when you have X number of slots, and you have to show X+1 programs, what can you do? Something has to give. Obviously you would have rather had DirecTV not show one of the football games, but why would DirecTV make that choice?

And for the record, I don't subscribe to NFLST.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Jeremy W said:


> You pay $10/month for HD Access, NFLST+SF subscribers pay $90/month for their package.


And your point is? This type of action is the main reason I am currently in negotiations to switch to a different provider for the business. Tired of having patients that compain because directv pulled a HD channel because of something they have no interest in.

BTW pay a lot more the a measely 90 a month for the business package, would love to see it that low.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> And your point is?


Apparently completely missed by you.


wingrider01 said:


> This type of action is the main reason I am currently in negotiations to switch to a different provider for the business.


That's funny, because they haven't done it since last year.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> I was being a bit sarcastic... Here is reality.. I am running Vista Ultimate on a laptop that came out 3 years before vista, and a desktop on a computer that came out 4 years before Vista, and I have almost no issues at all these days. Its actually more stable now than XP was on these machines that where designed for XP...
> 
> Vista is a looser in terms of acceptance, but not in terms of quality, any more or less so than XP, from my personal experience... I really don't know what so many people complain about, other than when it first hit, many drivers seemed to be missing..
> 
> .


Vista is a "implied loser" simpley because people don;t understand it and are not willing to learn something, goes a long way to proving the old adage of "sometimes it helps to be smarter then the machine", the problem came in when they did not put the stronger security model in XP, the model was there and ready to be implemented but it was not. Not to far fromt eh time that 3rd party manufacturers start dropping development of drivers for XP. 99 percne to f XP users just did a administrator level account and went with it - not the brightest thing in the world especially if you keep personal records on a machine.

The only drivers that where hard to come by when it was releasedare for hardware that is 2 or 3 years out of date - this is NOT the fault of MS, but the fault of the company that designed the hardware, but then again it was the same exact thing when XP hit the streets, major difference is XP drivers can be used in Vista 32 bit where as they cannot int he 64 bit - the XP-64 release was a joke


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

CorpITGuy said:


> An HD channel broadcasting 4:3 SD is still much clearer than an SD channel broadcasting the same.
> 
> That doesn't excuse the lack of HD content, but I did want to point that out.


But that raises another complaint about these channels (MTV, CMT, VH-1). It's NOT lack of HD programming because many times they do broadcast HD content...in SD.

Like I've said before, how many times has a program been broadcast in HD on MHD (Palladium) the same time that it was being simulcast on MTV or CMT in SD in 16:9 with black bars all around? What is the excuse for that?


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

gquiring said:


> Ok I get it, but it was not right to yank a channel that is paid for. I am sure you would not want a football game yanked if some other group paid more for their package.





wingrider01 said:


> And your point is? This type of action is the main reason I am currently in negotiations to switch to a different provider for the business. Tired of having patients that compain because directv pulled a HD channel because of something they have no interest in.
> 
> BTW pay a lot more the a measely 90 a month for the business package, would love to see it that low.


Couple of things .. This was ONLY TNT HD .. TNT SD was still available and most importantly .. Jeremy's right .. This hasn't been done for about a year now .. There's nothing here to complain about now.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> DirecTV doesn't make any claims that it is HD. They simply pass on the MTVHD channel that MTV gives them. DirecTV says "We offer MTVHD" and that claim is 100% valid. DirecTV says nothing about the amount of HD content on any channel.


Sure, technically it is a valid claim but it doesn't make it right. I believe that when you claim to have something, you should deliver it. Saying "We have MTVHD" when there isn't any hd on MTV is really nothing more than slimy used car salesman tactics (no offense to any honest used car salesmen out there). "A/C blows cold." Yeah, in the dead of winter only.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

TigersFanJJ said:


> I believe that when you claim to have something, you should deliver it.


DirecTV is delivering it. If you want to put the blame somewhere, put it on MTV for offering MTVHD with little to no HD content. Don't blame DirecTV for simply passing on what they're given.


----------



## aa9vi (Sep 4, 2007)

I would hope D* gets its head out its rear and builds a box with an internal OTA tuner and channel scan. I have been holding on to my one H20 for a long time. I want ALL of my local channels and OTA is the only way to get them. Tribune Media/Zap-it is often too slow to respond to local subchannel changes. Waiting weeks for the guide updates is unreasonable. That's lost money for D* since I'm not upgrading that receiver. I'll upgrade that box to an HD-DVR when they build a new one that has two of the features of a HD receiver from 2003.

Plus, what's the holdup with local weather on the 8s for TWC-HD?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Jeremy W said:


> Don't blame DirecTV for simply passing on what they're given.


DIRECTV continues to claim MTV-HD as an HD channel among their other "legitimate" HD offerings and it certainly isn't showing signs of ever becoming one. "HD ready" is not HD.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

harsh said:


> DIRECTV continues to claim MTV-HD as an HD channel among their other "legitimate" HD offerings and it certainly isn't showing signs of ever becoming one. "HD ready" is not HD.


MTVHD has shown HD content, which means you're now getting into the messy area of trying to define an HD channel by how much HD they show. DirecTV passes on MTVHD as MTV presents it to them, which is all they can do. It's not DirecTV's fault that they show little in the way of actual HD. If a company is sending DirecTV an HD signal, DirecTV has an HD channel. It's really that simple.

I, for one, am glad that DirecTV just scooped it up when they could, instead of putzing around like they are doing now.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

If an FM stereo station broadcasts mostly old mono recordings, it is still an FM stereo station.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

harsh said:


> DIRECTV continues to claim MTV-HD as an HD channel among their other "legitimate" HD offerings and it certainly isn't showing signs of ever becoming one. "HD ready" is not HD.


Doesn't DISH and Comcast make the same claims? (assuming they have the channel)

If the channel is being deliverd in HD (which it is) .. It's an HD channel .. MTV chooses to put the black bars on the side and only show the 4:3 upconverted SD content that it has ..

So yeah, it's a legitimate claim .. again, DIRECTV does not control the content and cannot make any claims to this content. What if MTV decided tomorrow to actually start putting HD content on their channel? Well, DIRECTV would be showing it because MTVHD is part of the lineup. :shrug:


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

aa9vi said:


> I would hope D* gets its head out its rear and builds a box with an internal OTA tuner and channel scan. I have been holding on to my one H20 for a long time. I want ALL of my local channels and OTA is the only way to get them. Tribune Media/Zap-it is often too slow to respond to local subchannel changes. Waiting weeks for the guide updates is unreasonable. That's lost money for D* since I'm not upgrading that receiver. I'll upgrade that box to an HD-DVR when they build a new one that has two of the features of a HD receiver from 2003.
> 
> Plus, what's the holdup with local weather on the 8s for TWC-HD?


I'm happy that you've found a solution that works for you, but I'm curious how DIRECTV has actually lost money on the deal .. You continue to pay your mirror/lease fee. Presumably and "upgrade" would mean that you replace this receiver with a different one. If you work out a "free" deal or a highly discounted deal that costs DIRECTV money, that mirror/lease fee will be used to pay off the remainder of the receiver costs. Ultimately, it will cost DIRECTV for you to get that upgrade.

Now, if you chose to cancel the service due to those conditions, then your point makes sense.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

harsh said:


> DIRECTV continues to claim MTV-HD as an HD channel among their other "legitimate" HD offerings and it certainly isn't showing signs of ever becoming one. "HD ready" is not HD.


If it is broadcast in HD format(720p or 1081i) then it is an HD channel. It's MTV's choice not to show any show or video's in HD not Directv's. So, Directv has every right too call it an HD channel.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> MTVHD has shown HD content, which means you're now getting into the messy area of trying to define an HD channel by how much HD they show. DirecTV passes on MTVHD as MTV presents it to them, which is all they can do. It's not DirecTV's fault that they show little in the way of actual HD. If a company is sending DirecTV an HD signal, DirecTV has an HD channel. It's really that simple.
> 
> I, for one, am glad that DirecTV just scooped it up when they could, instead of putzing around like they are doing now.


:lol: If we go by what he is saying then NBC is not going to be an HD channel either. Since they are going the cheap way and doing more reality shows not shot in HD.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The point here is that you must go out several decimal places to represent the percentage of HD content on MTV-HD but DIRECTV is still _promoting_ it as one. That DIRECTV didn't get what they bargained for is not justification for misleading their subscribers and prospective subscribers. I use the term "misleading" because I'm pretty sure that DIRECTV knows that sustained HD programming isn't coming to MTV-HD any time soon.

If DIRECTV wants to promote it as "enhanced SD" as compared to their typical SD quality, that's another story.

For those who missed or forgot my definition of an HD channel, it is one that shows at least 20% HD sourced content _in HD_.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

Uh, it IS still an HD channel


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> Doesn't DISH and Comcast make the same claims? (assuming they have the channel)


MTV-HD appears to be a DIRECTV exclusive.

edit: It appears that some Cox systems and some Verizon systems also carry what they call MTV HD.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

Then I guess USA HD, TNT HD, ABC Family HD, NBC, and CW would not be classified and HD channels either. Because some or most of there programing in not in HD either.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

mhayes70 said:


> Uh, it IS still an HD channel


MTV-HD _could be_ an HD channel.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

harsh said:


> MTV-HD _could be_ an HD channel.


Whatever, it IS. MTV just chooses not to show HD content most of the time.


----------



## MIAMI1683 (Jul 11, 2007)

harsh said:


> MTV-HD appears to be a DIRECTV exclusive.


 But what you are saying aboout MTVHD and D*. Comcast does as well with thier "HD" stuff. Ever see a Comcast commercial?


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

MIAMI1683 said:


> But what you are saying aboout MTVHD and D*. Comcast does as well with thier "HD" stuff. Ever see a Comcast commercial?


It's not an HD channel because Dish doesn't carry it. That's all harsh is saying.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

harsh said:


> For those who missed or forgot my definition of an HD channel, it is one that shows at least 20% HD sourced content _in HD_.


Ah .. there's your problem .. it's YOUR definition, not THE definition ..

If the program is is being broadcast in 1920x1080 or 1280x720, then it is HD .. It doesn't really matter if 25% of that content happens to be black bars .. It's still being transmitted from the source to your TV without any changes.

Besides, DIRECTV is claiming to be providing MTV-HD channel which is exactly what they are doing .. Apparently you want the to claim to be providing "MTV-HD with no HD programming on this channel" instead ..

Again, MTV provides the programming content, so while there may not be any HD programming, it is still an HD channel (which is what DIRECTV provides). :shrug:


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Then why does everyone say vista is bad?
> 
> And where dose it say Directv pulled the plug for no reason? Why would they pull the plug on something if its development is coming along on schedule and looks promising. Microsoft was developing it, not Directv...


Who's "everyone". Just as with "everyone" saying the HRxx's are bad, sometimes a bad reputation not close to the truth. With the MAC commercials spreading these lies and people just not used to the new layout, that alone is enough. I have VISTA on 4 different computers (Business on 1, Home Premium 32 on two, and Home Premium 64 on 1) and I have never had a problem with it. It just takes a little while to get used to the interface.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

prospero63 said:


> This is known as argumentum ad populum.


Exactly...


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

harsh said:


> *Largely because it is bad.*
> 
> Regardless of whether Vista is bad or not, it is what everyone must deal with and apparently DIRECTV has decided they're not up to the task at this time.


Why? I haven't had any problems, nor did anyone else I know.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

gregjones said:


> Financially, Vista has been a failure for Microsoft. This has been stated by a definitive source: Microsoft. This assertion is now supported by Microsoft's current PR campaign outlining their attempt to overcome the negative consumer opinion of Vista.


Partially because of the the reputation, perpetrated a lot by Apple. Care to address why it is BAD? This was the original point.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Jeremy W said:


> It's not an HD channel because Dish doesn't carry it. That's all harsh is saying.


Not at all.

I'm claiming its not an HD channel because it doesn't deliver HD content.

MTV-HD has been around for just shy of two years and still nothing of consequence.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

DodgerKing said:


> Why? I haven't had any problems, nor did anyone else I know.


Apparently DIRECTV had enough trouble that they opted to suspend development on their Vista based project.

I've personally had nothing but difficulties with Vista and it has made nothing that I do easier or more efficient.


----------



## MIAMI1683 (Jul 11, 2007)

harsh said:


> Apparently DIRECTV had enough trouble that they opted to suspend development on their Vista based project.
> 
> I've personally had nothing but difficulties with Vista and it has made nothing that I do easier or more efficient.


 Ok first D* shut down the program and we don't know why. Maybe it was due to financial reasons.

Now as far as Vista goes. It is quite simply better than any other Windows product no exceptions. If you personaly have a hard time using it. I say thats user error. For me I wish my company would switch cause XP sucks IMHO. Always has. When Windows 7 is released and people actually think it's "better than Vista" I will be laughing cause the base code is the same. So much so in fact the the Windows7 advisor on my beta disk takes me to the Vista advisor. Even my PC drivers will be identical.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

MIAMI1683 said:


> Ok first D* shut down the program and we don't know why. Maybe it was due to financial reasons.
> 
> Now as far as Vista goes. It is quite simply better than any other Windows product no exceptions. If you personaly have a hard time using it. I say thats user error. For me I wish my company would switch cause XP sucks IMHO. Always has. When Windows 7 is released and people actually think it's "better than Vista" I will be laughing cause the base code is the same. So much so in fact the the Windows7 advisor on my beta disk takes me to the Vista advisor. Even my PC drivers will be identical.


The problem that has slowed down Vista's acceptance and hurt Microsoft has nothing to do with those inane commercials. Corporate desktops did not get upgraded to Vista because Vista exacted a considerable performance penalty on older hardware. The same computer often needs 2-3 times more memory to run comparably to its performance under XP. Before, Microsoft counted a very substantial part of the OS sales as nearly automatic, where corporate desktops would shift en masse to the new version. The higher memory requirements, coupled with a significant lack of driver support for hardware, cut down the number of upgrades.

Many hardware manufacturers made no plans whatsoever to port their device drivers to Vista. While a minor irritation on a handful of machines, this became a major problem for companies with hundreds or thousands of desktops with unsupported hardware. Many have pointed to device driver development as a key issue with the DirecTV PC Tuner.

Most technology insiders fully expect each new OS version to have a bit more bloat and push the hardware a little more. It is sad, but we have all come to expect it. Vista, in many cases, made very useful hardware no longer productive due to the heavy resource needs.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

harsh said:


> Apparently DIRECTV had enough trouble that they opted to suspend development on their Vista based project.
> 
> I've personally had nothing but difficulties with Vista and it has made nothing that I do easier or more efficient.


Like what? The only complaint I have with Vista is the fact that it is slightly more inconvenient to change anything due to the constant asking, "Are you sure?" This is more of a security issue, but I wish they would allow the user to have the option to turn it off. Other than that, 4 computers with Vista and fewer problems than with XP.


----------



## werinshades (Oct 11, 2007)

Speaking for myself, I really don't see many issues here with DirecTV. I'm very particular with any service that is provided to me...cell, satellite, etc., and will not hesitiate to cancel and pay an early termination fee if I feel I can get a better deal somewhere else. I'm satisfied with the amount of channels, HD quality and all the extras I get with DirecTV. I have added Superfan and the MLB package and had no problem paying for an additional service I requested. If you really feel like you're getting a bad deal, then switch to Dish or cable. No one is holding you here, and to the OP if it's really pissin you off, make the switch. Don't let a simple thing like television get under your skin that much. Maybe get out of the house and enjoy life a bit I say. 
Here's how simple you can make things with DirecTV:
A few months ago I called DirecTV and requested a service call for "pixellation problems". The values were low, and I knew with winter approaching I would be having problems. All values are now 95%, had a few snow/ice storms here, and never lost my signal...wollah!! Problem resolved. Didn't have to go to a forum to complain, just picked up the phone and waited. Service tech was professional, took him about half hour, and off he went. More should go this route instead of going to forums where their complaints will fall on deaf ears. Make that your 2009 resolution...


----------



## HDJulie (Aug 10, 2008)

DodgerKing said:


> Like what? The only complaint I have with Vista is the fact that it is slightly more inconvenient to change anything due to the constant asking, "Are you sure?" This is more of a security issue, but I wish they would allow the user to have the option to turn it off. Other than that, 4 computers with Vista and fewer problems than with XP.


Are you talking about User Account Control? As long as your account has administrator rights, you can tun that off. Start->Control Panel->Security Center. Click on Other Security Settings & there should be a button that says Turn off User Account Control. It turns it off completely, though. No more asking at all.

I love Vista but that's the first thing I turn off when I build a pc.


----------



## racermd (Dec 18, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> Like what? The only complaint I have with Vista is the fact that it is slightly more inconvenient to change anything due to the constant asking, "Are you sure?" This is more of a security issue, but I wish they would allow the user to have the option to turn it off. Other than that, 4 computers with Vista and fewer problems than with XP.


Solution for disabling the User Access Control prompts:

1: Run "msconfig" (type that - without quotes - in the Run or Search box or in a command-prompt window)
2: Click on the "Tools" tab
3: Highlight the item named "Disable UAC"
4: Click "Launch"
5: Reboot

Another method to disable UAC is at this link.

Just to chime in on Vista vs. XP vs. kitchen sink... Vista pushes older hardware more only if you leave all the new features and eye-candy turned on. I'll admit that it will never be as svelte as Windows XP can be when tuned appropriately (go look for XP Embedded in your favorite search engine). However, it's hardly the resource hog that its reputation implies.

For those of you that know a thing or two about computers, turning off SuperFetch and Aero will bring performance back in line with an untuned Windows XP install. Clearing some other un-needed services (SSDP and other 'helpers' in particular) will improve things even more. ReadyBoost is nearly useless, but I have seen limited cases where it makes an improvement. Keep in mind, this is mostly anecdotal, though from my own experiences as an IT professional.

HR2x? I still have 3 of the 'original' HR20-700 units from late '06 and the most I can complain about is the occasional frame-dropping, video-stuttering behavior I mention periodically in other threads. Through all the other complaints about unreliable hardware, broken features, etc., my 3 units have been solid. Granted, I have run my own cabling, re-aimed my own dish a couple of times, and haven't had a need to call on D* support lines.

Am I perfectly happy with the boxes? No. For one, I really do wish that D* would get MRV in gear and do it right. By that, I mean offer an tuner- and storage-expandable back-end unit for recording and a lightweight front-end unit for display. Unless and until that happens, the HR2x boxes are the next best thing.

Tivo? I'd love one so long as it's on current hardware and can get current D* signals.

Rates? Like every other customer out there, I want it all for free (or nearly free). That's at odds with D*'s objective of making a profit. I don't want to see rate hikes. However, I'll pay what I think the total product is worth. If not, then I'll move on to a competitor, which I recently did with internet providers.

As always, that's my $.02.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

harsh said:


> The point here is that you must go out several decimal places to represent the percentage of HD content on MTV-HD but DIRECTV is still _promoting_ it as one. That DIRECTV didn't get what they bargained for is not justification for misleading their subscribers and prospective subscribers. I use the term "misleading" because I'm pretty sure that DIRECTV knows that sustained HD programming isn't coming to MTV-HD any time soon.
> 
> If DIRECTV wants to promote it as "enhanced SD" as compared to their typical SD quality, that's another story.


And how quick do you think MTV would be to take DirecTV to court if they promoted the MTV-HD channel that MTV contracted to provide them as "Enhanced SD - because they really don't show much HD content on it". Get real. It's promoted as MTV-HD because that is the product that MTV is selling DirecTV - if you have issues with the amount of actual HD content, that's MTV's problem, not DirecTV's.


harsh said:


> For those who missed or forgot my definition of an HD channel, it is one that shows at least 20% HD sourced content _in HD_.


No disrespect intended, but I [strike]could give a rodent's hind-quarters[/strike] couldn't care less what your personal definition of an HD channel is - I'll leave the defining to those in the industry.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

harsh said:



> MTV-HD has been around for just shy of two years and still nothing of consequence.


MTVHD has been around for just over one year.


----------



## joenhre (Nov 8, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Then why does *everyone* say vista is bad?


I have Vista Ultimate 64 installed on two different PCs and haven't had much problem with it at all.No more than I had with Windows XP.For me Vista actually runs faster and smoother than XP ever did.So saying *everyone* is too broad a generalization.I'm not saying that M$ is without it's faults or that they didn't have anything to do with the failed release of the Directv PC card.Just saying that Vista isn't as bad as some people want to make it out to be.

Of course many people blast the HR-21 receivers, other than at first dealing with the slowness of the interface and the guide, which has been improved with the latest firmware releases,my two HR21-200s have been solid performers.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> DirecTV is delivering it. If you want to put the blame somewhere, put it on MTV for offering MTVHD with little to no HD content. Don't blame DirecTV for simply passing on what they're given.


I never put the blame on Directv for MTV not delivering HD content. My issue is Directv passing it off as HD when it is SD 99.9% of the time.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

Great whizzing match folks but I bet not much changes.... :lol:


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

BKC said:


> Great whizzing match folks but I bet not much changes.... :lol:


Great. Now the thread is going to go off topic about whizz.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

TigersFanJJ said:


> I never put the blame on Directv for MTV not delivering HD content. My issue is Directv passing it off as HD when it is SD 99.9% of the time.


DIRECTV has two MTV channels on their lineup .. I'm sure if they advertised "MTV" and "MTV not so HD" that MTV would have a problem with that .. Don't shoot the messenger.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> DIRECTV has two MTV channels on their lineup .. I'm sure if they advertised "MTV" and "MTV not so HD" that MTV would have a problem with that .. Don't shoot the messenger.


Seems like DIRECTV should be having a calf about some sort of breach of contract as it is. As I suggested earlier, maybe they could call it MTV at the quality that you might get with BUD or cable.

Then again, they get to count it as an HD channel that only takes up a fraction of the bandwidth of a true HD channel.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> DIRECTV has two MTV channels on their lineup .. I'm sure if they advertised "MTV" and "MTV not so HD" that MTV would have a problem with that .. Don't shoot the messenger.


If Directv didn't put it in the contract that they don't have to advertise it as being in hd when it really isn't, well then, that is their fault.

I'm more inclined to believe that it has nothing at all to do with the contract and every bit to do with Directv counting it so that they can call themselves the "HD leader." But I guess that's just me (and harsh).


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

TigersFanJJ said:


> If Directv didn't put it in the contract that they don't have to advertise it as being in hd when it really isn't, well then, that is their fault.
> 
> I'm more inclined to believe that it has nothing at all to do with the contract and every bit to do with Directv counting it so that they can call themselves the "HD leader." But I guess that's just me (and harsh).


So MTV-HD is the only reason DirecTV is the HD leader?.

Sorry I have to respectfully disagree.


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

I for one have never found anything in print that MTV calls themselve HD. D* calls them HD but where does MTV say "were HD"? or CMT


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

harsh said:


> Seems like DIRECTV should be having a calf about some sort of breach of contract as it is. As I suggested earlier, maybe they could call it MTV at the quality that you might get with BUD or cable.
> 
> Then again, they get to count it as an HD channel that only takes up a fraction of the bandwidth of a true HD channel.


Nope .. it's still transmitted at full HD .. perhaps it compresses better with the black bars on the side, but the black bars are part of the transmission .. they are not from the TV.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

rkr0923 said:


> I for one have never found anything in print that MTV calls themselve HD. D* calls them HD but where does MTV say "were HD"? or CMT


The Channel is MTV-HD .. that's it's name.


----------



## VeniceDre (Aug 16, 2006)

Having just get back from my Mother's home on the central coast of California and dealing with the limited choices she had with basic Cable through Charter I am happy to back home with my DirecTV service.

That being said, get off your butt DirecTV and give us some more channels! :lol:


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

gquiring said:


> Ok I get it, but it was not right to yank a channel that is paid for. I am sure you would not want a football game yanked if some other group paid more for their package.


You should see what all the cable companies are doing to people who don't use cable boxes. They are constantly rasing rates,and removing channels from the analogue teirs and making them digital only channles, so they can clear up space, and charge higher rates for digital boxes. They are doing this on a regular basis and a lot more than 3 channels one time when they was a major shift and additon in other hd channels. Directv may have taken away a coupl echannels from a package,but they added tons in there place..

I get sick everytime I see my grandmas tv bill and what channels she has left...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Harsh,

Based on your definition of HD.. Dish doesn't have a single channel in HD,since they don't provide any channels with full pixel resolution and frame refresh rates that are HD spec....

Interesting how much you worry about one MTV-HD channel on Directv and how its marketed, yet Dish is ok claiming HD channels when not one is, based on your definition.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

Jhon69 said:


> So MTV-HD is the only reason DirecTV is the HD leader?.
> 
> Sorry I have to respectfully disagree.


I never said it was the only reason they were the hd leader. 

There were other channels mentioned earlier that were also said to not broadcast in hd. Plus many other channels that are part time only, play the same programming as 10-20 other hd channels at the same time, and a ton of ppv channels that only show three or four different shows at a time. Add all of those up and 60 or so suddenly becomes 130+ to make you the "HD Leader."


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

TigersFanJJ said:


> There were other channels mentioned earlier that were also said to not broadcast in hd.


For a quick reference guide to percentage of HD content, visit http://www.whereishd.com and search for "HD ready".

DIRECTV used to link to this site as evidence of their superiority but there was some backlash regarding the percentages.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

TigersFanJJ said:


> I never said it was the only reason they were the hd leader.
> 
> There were other channels mentioned earlier that were also said to not broadcast in hd. Plus many other channels that are part time only, play the same programming as 10-20 other hd channels at the same time, and a ton of ppv channels that only show three or four different shows at a time. Add all of those up and 60 or so suddenly becomes 130+ to make you the "HD Leader."


Well if I misread your post,I apologize,so I read it again and whatever your post is supposed to mean is fine by me.

So going back on topic it just seems there is alot of complaining about how DirecTV is adding HD.But if you look at the whole picture the economy's in the crapper,DirecTV's basic ownership has changed,plus it seems negotiations are stalled.The HD now being added are HD locals,but if you remember DirecTV did have problems with the spotbeams on D10,so to see more HD locals being added on D11 would seem the right thing to happen.

And yet DirecTV remains the national HD leader!.Imagine that!.:sure:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

OF course 2009 will be better than 2008....another HD sat will be up there and more HD channels.....DUH...:lol:

Happy New Year indeed.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> OF course 2009 will be better than 2008....another HD sat will be up there and more HD channels.....DUH...:lol:
> 
> Happy New Year indeed.


Have they made an announcement on the date of the new launch? Also, does anyone know what slot D12 will be parked at? Sorry if I'm going off topic a little but I really haven't kept up with it and your post sparked my interest a little.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Check the sticky at the top of the General Discussion page. I haven't looked at it for a while, but if I recall, Sixto does a pretty good job of keeping the first post updated.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> The Channel is MTV-HD .. that's it's name.


Given the name, what kind of content should one expect to find there?

Why don't they call it MTV-3D while they're at it?


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

harsh said:


> Given the name, what kind of content should one expect to find there?
> 
> Why don't they call it MTV-3D while they're at it?


Because it is broadcast in HD not 3D.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

harsh said:


> Given the name, what kind of content should one expect to find there?
> 
> Why don't they call it MTV-3D while they're at it?


Beats me, but it's good to hear that you are realizing it's MTV and not DIRECTV that is at "fault" in this.


----------



## mhayes70 (Mar 21, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> Beats me, but it's good to hear that you are realizing it's MTV and not DIRECTV that is at "fault" in this.


Wow, that is a good point. :lol:


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

When I am made TV Czar in the near future, my first decree will be that in order to declare a channel 'HD' that channel will be required to air only true HD material (excluding advertisements). Otherwise they may only carry a DT designation. This also wil include any station attempting to pass of any form of stretch-o-vision as HD as well.
Punishment will be swift and severe...


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Mr. Scott, should that happen, I expect your retribution to be aimed at TBS first of all. They are the worst for claiming HD when it isn't, aren't they? 

Also, I'd very much appreciate it if Your Czarness would consider seven-figure fines to providers who routinely provide incomplete guide data (Comedy Central, are you listening?)


----------



## Draconis (Mar 16, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Also, I'd very much appreciate it if Your Czarness would consider seven-figure fines to providers who routinely provide incomplete guide data (Comedy Central, are you listening?)


:lol: What about the Science Channel? (channel 284)

New episodes of "Beyond Tomorrow" NEVER have ANY guide data and you cannot setup a series link for "First Run" only because the IRD sees EVERYTHING as first run.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> When I am made TV Czar in the near future, my first decree will be that in order to declare a channel 'HD' that channel will be required to air only true HD material (excluding advertisements). Otherwise they may only carry a DT designation. This also wil include any station attempting to pass of any form of stretch-o-vision as HD as well.
> Punishment will be swift and severe...


And let it be that stretching or distortion of the picture at the provider shall be a capital offense in the land.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

gregjones said:


> And let it be that stretching or distortion of the picture at the provider shall be a capital offense in the land.


+1


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

OK, so back on track, what was so bad about 2008 for D* subscribers? Of course there were many things I wanted and did not get (like MRV, DLB Travel HD, and maybe some others), but such is life. The channel lineup was expanded and we got better software for the IRD's, and some people got some nice anniversary gifts. Sounds like a pretty good year to me!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I hope DirecTV also contines to help fund Friday Night Lights, it would be sad to see that show go away.


----------



## Piratefan98 (Mar 11, 2008)

rudeney said:


> OK, so back on track, what was so bad about 2008 for D* subscribers?


DirecTV didn't deliver on their National HD hype for D11. That's what was bad.

Sure .... locals and RSNs and MPEG2 conversions were good thing .... but they shouted National HD from the rooftops upon the launch of D11, and delivered next to nothing on that front. All talk and no results.

Jeff


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Mr. Scott, should that happen, I expect your retribution to be aimed at TBS first of all. They are the worst for claiming HD when it isn't, aren't they?


They shall be held as an example for others to ponder.



Stuart Sweet said:


> Also, I'd very much appreciate it if Your Czarness would consider seven-figure fines to providers who routinely provide incomplete guide data (Comedy Central, are you listening?)


It is noted.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

gregjones said:


> And let it be that stretching or distortion of the picture at the provider shall be a capital offense in the land.


One of the best things about being Czar is that I have to be neither fair nor rational. 
Let it also be known that I consider excessive image compression of any channel, be it HD or SD, an offense of equal magnitude.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

mhayes70 said:


> Because it is broadcast in HD not 3D.


But the content is every bit as much 3D as it is HD and they don't have to wait around for the technology to deliver it to arrive.


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> The Channel is MTV-HD .. that's it's name.


Again, I beg to differ.........do a search of MTVHD and see what you get.
Palladia or MTVNHD in Poland, there is No MTVHD!
That's the name D* gave it.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

rkr0923 said:


> there is No MTVHD!
> That's the name D* gave it.


Did DirecTV give it the logo too? Did DirecTV produce the HD content on it that I've seen?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

rkr0923 said:


> Again, I beg to differ.........do a search of MTVHD and see what you get.
> Palladia or MTVNHD in Poland, there is No MTVHD!
> That's the name D* gave it.


MTV Networks also operates Palladia, a high-definition channel that features original HD programming and HD versions of programs from MTV, VH1, and CMT. The station was launched in January 2006 as MHD (Music: High Definition). The channel was officially rebranded as Palladia on September 1, 2008 to coincide with the shift to more exclusive HD programming.

Palladia and MTV-HD are 2 different channels. Palladia was called MHD, never called MTV-HD. MTV-HD is one of those so called "HD" channels, very little HD on it. MTV is so proud of it, they don't even carry the MTV-HD logo on their own site.


----------

