# More HD soon?



## CapeCodder (Mar 19, 2008)

Sky Report says this morning that DISH has hit the 100 HD channel mark (see below). Considering the competitive environment, Dtv must feel disadvantaged at only 95. With DT11 coming on line shortly, every available HD channel is likely targeted for inclusion. And with DISH ahead, the pressure for an earlier rather than later activation must be building at Dtv. Now the question is "will we have to pay more?" Or instead perhaps, "how much more will we have to pay?" 

http://www.skyreport.com/
DISH Reaches 100 HD Channel Goal
On Thursday, DISH Network announced plans to launch 17 national HD channels, a move that puts the DBS service past its year-end goal of reaching 100 national HD channels, five months ahead of schedule.

The new HD channels that will be added are: ActionMax HD, CBS College Sports HD, Lifetime HD, Lifetime Movie Network HD, Planet Green HD, Encore HD, HBO 2 HD, HBO Comedy HD, HBO Family HD, HBO Latino HD, HBO Signature HD, HBO West HD, HBO Zone HD, Starz Comedy HD, Starz Edge HD, Starz Kids and Family.

Also, DISH took the wraps off TurboHD, an all-HD programming package that comes with advanced equipment that works on all TVs. TurboHD offers the most-watched HD channels in four separate tiers and can be viewed on analog, digital and high-def TVs. The product is aimed at consumers who have or are considering an upgrade to HD programming.

All TurboHD packages can include HD locals where available.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Why are you assuming we'll have to pay more? I don't understand the logic.

Being discussed over here, too: http://dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=132917


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

CapeCodder said:


> Sky Report says this morning that DISH has hit the 100 HD channel mark (see below)...


No "goal" has been reached yet. The date is 8/1.

D11 may go "live" prior. If not, E* will have the lead for literally days.

BTW, the DirecTV "goal" is up to *150* by year-end.


----------



## CapeCodder (Mar 19, 2008)

tcusta00 said:


> Why are you assuming we'll have to pay more? I don't understand the logic.
> 
> Being discussed over here, too: http://dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=132917


TCUSTA00 - No special reason for the assumption, just a sense that the 10 buck, 3 buck deal is relatively cheap, and that some of the new channels might want some compensation. Could (hopefully) be wrong. The big driver, of course, is how much DISH will get for their new HD service.


----------



## QuickDrop (Jul 21, 2007)

CapeCodder said:


> Sky Report says this morning that DISH has hit the 100 HD channel mark (see below). Considering the competitive environment, Dtv must feel disadvantaged at only 95. With DT11 coming on line shortly, every available HD channel is likely targeted for inclusion. And with DISH ahead, the pressure for an earlier rather than later activation must be building at Dtv.


Personally, I would be surprised if DirecTV plans were so knee-jerk that they would be scurrying around to get the channels up a couple days before Dish. I do think there is added pressure for an HD only tier, though I don't believe that would appeal to the great majority of subscribers to any service.


----------



## scrybigtv (Jan 25, 2008)

The competition between D*, E* and cable is understandable. These guys are all competing for a share of the same TV viewing dollar. But what I find amusing is the apparent competition between message board posters who favor either D* or E*. It always seems to offend one group if someone has something good to say about the other.

I was a longtime customer of E*. I changed to D* because Dish no longer could offer MLB EI. In my opinion, both are great services and each has certain advantages over the other. I obviously now favor D*, as I'm a customer of D* and proud of it. It doesn't offend me, however, when I hear that E* has added some HD channels. I'm glad they were able to do something good for their customers.


----------



## Visman (Feb 17, 2008)

I think there will be allot of upgrades and improvements in DirecTV programing and services after the Olympics and the start of the NFL seasons and the Fall TV schedule. D* will at least have over 125 national channels in HD, their will be many different packages the we can choose from. We just need to be a little more passionate.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

scrybigtv said:


> The competition between D*, E* and cable is understandable. These guys are all competing for a share of the same TV viewing dollar. But what I find amusing is the apparent competition between message board posters who favor either D* or E*. It always seems to offend one group if someone has something good to say about the other.
> 
> I was a longtime customer of E*. I changed to D* because Dish no longer could offer MLB EI. In my opinion, both are great services and each has certain advantages over the other. I obviously now favor D*, as I'm a customer of D* and proud of it. It doesn't offend me, however, when I hear that E* has added some HD channels. I'm glad they were able to do something good for their customers.


This has been going on for years on these message boards it really is comical


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

QuickDrop said:


> Personally, I would be surprised if DirecTV plans were so knee-jerk that they would be scurrying around to get the channels up a couple days before Dish. I do think there is added pressure for an HD only tier, though I don't believe that would appeal to the great majority of subscribers to any service.


What makes you think that DirecTV would have to scurry around in a knee-jerk attempt to get D11 online before DISH lights up their new channels on August 1? DirecTV has been taking a slow and methodical approach to getting D11 online and last week before DISH's announcement, all indications were that DirecTV was wrapping up the testing of D11 at 100.7W, meaning that it could be ready to go online within weeks.

I suspect that DISH's announcement of adding more HD channels is more a reaction to DirecTV's impending debut of D11 rather than the other way around.


----------



## mystic7 (Dec 9, 2007)

If they're including CBS College Sports HD, then technically Dish is still at 99 channels. That channel doesn't even show upconverted SD. It's no better than Fox News SD.


----------



## bruinfever (Jul 19, 2007)

I read this report and its unbelievable....Where in the hell are they getting the capabilities to add so many HD channels? For the past six months they keep adding channels and they have no new birds in the sky. I kept thinking compression but there is no way they can compress this much....


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

bruinfever said:


> I read this report and its unbelievable....Where in the hell are they getting the capabilities to add so many HD channels? For the past six months they keep adding channels and they have no new birds in the sky. I kept thinking compression but there is no way they can compress this much....


It's likely a combination of compression and desperation. DirecTV could probably add a ton more HD right now without the new bird, but they aren't because they want to have space available "just in case" something happens. Desperate times call for desperate measures:


----------



## merchione (Apr 28, 2008)

tcusta00 said:


> It's likely a combination of compression and desperation. DirecTV could probably add a ton more HD right now without the new bird, but they aren't because they want to have space available "just in case" something happens. Desperate times call for desperate measures:


Thats why D* is the leader in HD!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

bruinfever said:


> I read this report and its unbelievable....Where in the hell are they getting the capabilities to add so many HD channels?


As a matter of fact, DISH Network has substantially more satellite bandwidth than DIRECTV and it has been that way for some time. The advantage that DIRECTV has is that they've got most of it available on one large dish.


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

I've been reading some of the Dish threads and many mention the quality of Dish HD has declined a bit. I guess they have to get the bandwidth from somewhere, I just wonder if they're doing the right thing?

As far as I know, they don't have a new bird in place?


----------



## bruinfever (Jul 19, 2007)

harsh said:


> As a matter of fact, DISH Network has substantially more satellite bandwidth than DIRECTV and it has been that way for some time. The advantage that DIRECTV has is that they've got most of it available on one large dish.


That one large dish being the main dish that's used for the majority of subscribers. The bandwidth available on the "main dish" for DirecTV is much higher than the "main dish" for DISH? Correct?


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

bruinfever said:


> I read this report and its unbelievable....Where in the hell are they getting the capabilities to add so many HD channels? For the past six months they keep adding channels and they have no new birds in the sky. I kept thinking compression but there is no way they can compress this much....


Well, their much ballyhoo'd recent addition wound up being a net gain of 3 as they dropped Voom channels within days.

Also, I look at the Dish method of channel distribution and it confuses the heck out of me. They actually have replication of channels on more than one satellite. They wind up in different places in the guide and require different hardware and (I think) are not completely accessible by everyone all over the US.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Sixto said:


> No "goal" has been reached yet. The date is 8/1.


Announcing how they're going to get there is one thing. Executing the plan is an entirely different story. This press release makes it sounds like it has already happened and that's just wrong. In reading the uplink reports, there doesn't appear to be any indication that these channels are uplinked yet.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

Harsh,

You are entertaining if nothing else


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

harsh said:


> This press release makes it sounds like it has already happened and that's just wrong.


No it doesn't...



CapeCodder said:


> http://www.skyreport.com/
> DISH Reaches 100 HD Channel Goal
> On Thursday, DISH Network announced *plans to launch *17 national HD channels, a move that puts the DBS service past its year-end goal of reaching 100 national HD channels, five months ahead of schedule.
> 
> The new HD channels that *will be added *are: ActionMax HD, CBS College Sports HD, Lifetime HD, Lifetime Movie Network HD, Planet Green HD, Encore HD, HBO 2 HD, HBO Comedy HD, HBO Family HD, HBO Latino HD, HBO Signature HD, HBO West HD, HBO Zone HD, Starz Comedy HD, Starz Edge HD, Starz Kids and Family.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Robertson said:


> Harsh,
> 
> You are entertaining if nothing else


Please don't feed the animals. :lol:


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> Please don't feed the animals. :lol:


You are right:eek2: sorry about that.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

tonyd79 said:


> Well, their much ballyhoo'd recent addition wound up being a net gain of 3 as they dropped Voom channels within days.


The net gain was 7 (22-15).


> Also, I look at the Dish method of channel distribution and it confuses the heck out of me. They actually have replication of channels on more than one satellite.


They mirror most specialty programming on two slots (61.5W and 129W). This methodology offers some options (and an inherent backup capacity) that using a single slot doesn't.


> They wind up in different places in the guide and require different hardware and (I think) are not completely accessible by everyone all over the US.


Mapping is always confusing, but they generally don't have different numbers based on what slot the channel comes from. There are some spotbeam LIL exceptions, but those don't usually impact an individual subscriber in any way.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

harsh said:


> As a matter of fact, DISH Network has substantially more satellite bandwidth than DIRECTV and it has been that way for some time. The advantage that DIRECTV has is that they've got most of it available on one large dish.


Unfortunately it's a problem when the whole country doesn't have line of sight to the entirety of that "substantially more satellite bandwidth" and a lot of it is wasted providing redundant feeds for opposite coasts, so your "hyping" of DISH's supposed bandwidth advantage was a less than compelling response to the poster's question of where is DISH going to get the bandwidth for their recently hyped HD expansion.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

harsh said:


> As a matter of fact, DISH Network has substantially more satellite bandwidth than DIRECTV and it has been that way for some time. The advantage that DIRECTV has is that they've got most of it available on one large dish.


Not 100% accurate. Many of the extra birds are mirrored east and west coast feeds (meaning no extra bandwidth as far as that goes). They do not actually have more extra bandwidth than Direct, they are simply maxing out their transponders and compressing their picture even further.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

tcusta00 said:


> No it doesn't...


The headline did imply that the goal has already been reached as it says "meets" (present tense) instead of "will meet"


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


> The headline did imply that the goal has already been reached as it says "meets" (present tense) instead of "will meet"


Since when do headlines tell the whole story? That's why there's "the story" part of it. :grin:


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


> The headline did imply that the goal has already been reached as it says "meets" (present tense) instead of "will meet"


Skyreport should have read DISH's hype more closely and realized that it hasn't happened yet. I guess that it is going to take a few weeks to increase the compression of the other HD channels to make room for the new ones.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

bruinfever said:


> That one large dish being the main dish that's used for the majority of subscribers. The bandwidth available on the "main dish" for DirecTV is much higher than the "main dish" for DISH? Correct?


In the net, the 5LNB dish from DIRECTV will offer more bandwidth after D11 is fully up and running. The DIRECTV capacity at 110W and 119W adds up to less than one slot worth of bandwidth as DISH owns most of the bandwidth at those slots.

The Dish 1000+ (110W, 118W, 119W, 129W) is probably catching more bandwidth than the Slimline.


----------



## CKNAV (Dec 26, 2005)

harsh said:


> As a matter of fact, DISH Network has substantially more satellite bandwidth than DIRECTV and it has been that way for some time. The advantage that DIRECTV has is that they've got most of it available on one large dish.


No E* does not. D* with Ka band satellites has alot more bandwith than E*. Also E* is reducing resolution on their channels so they can squeeze 7 HD channels per transponder, unlike D* that does 5 per.


----------



## Matt9876 (Oct 11, 2007)

Dish is compressing the heck out of their HD, the motion blurr effect is very noticeable now,They have added HD locals to several areas and more national feeds that bandwidth had to come from somewhere. (-VOOM +on mpeg channel compression).

DirecTV on the other hand is adding real capacity to support High quality HD programming, We may have to wait a few more weeks but the Fall TV season is going to look great!

This testing they are doing now will lead most likely to a 1080p picture in the next 3 to 4 years.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

tcusta00 said:


> Since when do headlines tell the whole story? That's why there's "the story" part of it. :grin:


True....But you know most people never get past the headline...


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


> True....But you know most people never get past the headline...


... which is unfortunate for them.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Only a marketing person would think that making all the HD channels look like SD in order to add more of them would be a good idea.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

Sirshagg said:


> Only a marketing person would think that making all the HD channels look like SD in order to add more of them would be a good idea.


Or Harsh:lol:


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

CKNAV said:


> No E* does not. D* with Ka band satellites has alot more bandwith than E*. Also E* is reducing resolution on their channels so they can squeeze 7 HD channels per transponder, unlike D* that does 5 per.


You misunderstood the use of bandwidth. Dish may have more bandwidth in total than DirecTV. Your response seems to be referring to bandwidth per channel. Dish is using less bandwidth per channel than DirecTV. Though Dish has a lot of total bandwidth, not all of it is available to all users because of the horizon being in the way.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Sirshagg said:


> Only a marketing person would think that making all the HD channels look like SD in order to add more of them would be a good idea.


LOL! I just got an image in my head of Ed Begley Jr and others sitting around a conference table, and some middle-aged, dark haired gentleman saying, "We CAN get more channels on those sats. All we have to do is s-q-u-e-e-z-e them some more so more of them fit. Then, wah-lah - more channels! Now who just saved Q3?" :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

harsh said:


> In the net, the 5LNB dish from DIRECTV will offer more bandwidth after D11 is fully up and running. The DIRECTV capacity at 110W and 119W adds up to less than one slot worth of bandwidth as DISH owns most of the bandwidth at those slots.
> 
> The Dish 1000+ (110W, 118W, 119W, 129W) is probably catching more bandwidth than the Slimline.


D* ka bandwidth(99, 101, 103) 1000 x3 ku(101)500 x1 ku(110, 119)500 x1/2 = 3750

E* ku (110W, 118W, 119W, 129W) 500 x4 = 2000 i'll even add 61..5 thats another 500 = 2500

hardly seems like more on one dish. if you want to add more dishes we con add 250 more for 72.5 plus D* fss at 95


----------



## kal915 (May 7, 2008)

Sixto said:


> No "goal" has been reached yet. The date is 8/1.
> 
> D11 may go "live" prior. If not, E* will have the lead for literally days.
> 
> BTW, the DirecTV "goal" is up to *150* by year-end.


The DirecTV goal last year was 100 HD channels by year-end, and they still havent met it. They probably will get more, but not 150


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

kal915 said:


> The DirecTV goal last year was 100 HD channels by year-end, and they still havent met it. They probably will get more, but not 150


Uh, NO!! Their goal was UP TO 100 channels by year-end. They met that on Jan 1 with the old mpeg2 stuff.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

In pursuit of the truth:


Sirshagg said:


> Uh, NO!! Their goal was UP TO 100 channels by year-end. They met that on Jan 1 with the old mpeg2 stuff.


Any "old MPEG2 stuff" that you refer to is (and has always been) part of the total HD channel count.

The issue was earlier when they didn't use the all important "up to" modifier. The 2007 CES Press Release claimed a "planned launch and carriage of 100 national high-definition (HD) channels". The key word here is "carriage" as opposed to capacity.

According to an account of a Chase Carey CES 2007 speech, there should be over 100. http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6405434.html

Once they revised their projections to be "up to", they could safely stop at the current <100 count and not have been overly optimistic. I haven't been able to find a press release detailing the "up to" version of the plans. I think it came from a conference call or other financial presentation.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

cartrivision said:


> Unfortunately it's a problem when the whole country doesn't have line of sight to the entirety of that "substantially more satellite bandwidth" and a lot of it is wasted providing redundant feeds for opposite coasts, so your "hyping" of DISH's supposed bandwidth advantage was a less than compelling response to the poster's question of where is DISH going to get the bandwidth for their recently hyped HD expansion.


The flaw in DIRECTV's model is that all of their eggs are in one slot and there are no backups until well into next year. DISH has two widely spaced slots for most all of their HD programming. Given any view of the Southern sky at all, the hopeful subscriber's chances of seeing either 61.5W or 129W are substantially higher than seeing just the 101W area.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

harsh said:


> The flaw in DIRECTV's model is that all of their eggs are in one slot and there are no backups until well into next year. DISH has two widely spaced slots for most all of their HD programming. Given any view of the Southern sky at all, the hopeful subscriber's chances of seeing either 61.5W or 129W are substantially higher than seeing just the 101W area.


I'm certain DirecTV is taking copious notes on all of your advice and hopes to someday aspire to the level of success you've reached with your satellite TV company. You're kind to dispense such valuable tidbits without a consulting fee. Kudos to you, my friend, kudos.


----------



## QuickDrop (Jul 21, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> What makes you think that DirecTV would have to scurry around in a knee-jerk attempt to get D11 online before DISH lights up their new channels on August 1? DirecTV has been taking a slow and methodical approach to getting D11 online and last week before DISH's announcement, all indications were that DirecTV was wrapping up the testing of D11 at 100.7W, meaning that it could be ready to go online within weeks.


That DirecTV has been setting its own time table for when D11 will go live was my point. It may go live before August 1; it may go live after August 1. Either way, it will because that's when it's ready to go live. I don't believe DirecTV cares what Dish does right now.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

harsh said:


> The flaw in DIRECTV's model is that all of their eggs are in one slot and there are no backups until well into next year. DISH has two widely spaced slots for most all of their HD programming. Given any view of the Southern sky at all, the hopeful subscriber's chances of seeing either 61.5W or 129W are substantially higher than seeing just the 101W area.


Do you even stop to think before you write this dumb stuff? DISH's widely spaced slots are not an advantage. They aren't a backup for each other either. They are expensive wasteful duplication because neither of the two widely spaced duplicates completely covers the whole country. If DISH lost one of those two widely spaced satellites, 50% of their current customers who get HD channels from the satellite would lose channels, and some of those 50% will have no way to get the lost channels from the "backup" satellite, and then the rest of those 50% will require expensive service calls to get a dish that points at another satellite to recover their lost channels. That's not backup.

Backup is DirecTV's D11 which in a few weeks will double the HD capacity that they have (which already provides more HD channels than their competition) D11 will give DirecTV 100% backup for their current HD capacity, and in less than a year D12 will add even more backup capacity.

If DirecTV had a catastrophic loss of D10 one month from now, their customers would still be able to get more HD channels than any other provider (by using D11), and without any satellite dish or other hardware additions or adjustments. That's backup.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> Do you even stop to think before you write this dumb stuff? DISH's widely spaced slots are not an advantage. They aren't a backup for each other either. They are expensive wasteful duplication because neither of the two widely spaced duplicates completely covers the whole country. If DISH lost one of those two widely spaced satellites, 50% of their current customers who get HD channels from the satellite would lose channels, and some of those 50% will have no way to get the lost channels from the "backup" satellite, and then the rest of those 50% will require expensive service calls to get a dish that points at another satellite to recover their lost channels. That's not backup.
> 
> Backup is DirecTV's D11 which in a few weeks will double the HD capacity that they have (which already provides more HD channels than their competition) D11 will give DirecTV 100% backup for their current HD capacity, end in less than a year D12 will add even more backup capacity.
> 
> If DirecTV had a catastrophic loss of D10 one month from now, their customers would still be able to get more HD channels than any other provider (by using D11), and without any satellite dish or other hardware additions or adjustments. That's backup.


ask him if he is counting the new Echostar that launches July 15?


----------



## levibluewa (Aug 13, 2005)

that the 129 is a hunk of junk and falling out of the sky, and that is where DISH is putting most of the HD that serves the western US. So if ya love to lose signal DISH is the place. More HD, but you might have to be happy with 5-10 minutes of signal loss an hour.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

kal915 said:


> The DirecTV goal last year was 100 HD channels by year-end, and they still havent met it. They probably will get more, but not 150


If they use the same counting scheme as Dish (counting their part time game only HD RSNs), then they have already surpassed 100.



harsh said:


> In pursuit of the truth:Any "old MPEG2 stuff" that you refer to is (and has always been) part of the total HD channel count.
> 
> The issue was earlier when they didn't use the all important "up to" modifier. The 2007 CES Press Release claimed a "planned launch and carriage of 100 national high-definition (HD) channels". The key word here is "carriage" as opposed to capacity.
> 
> ...


How about this truth? If Direct counted their channels exactly the same way Dish does, they would have even more HD channels listed.

No matter which standards of counting one uses (including or not including PPVs, including or not including part time game only RSNs, including or not including full time HD RSNs, including or not including DNSs) Direct still will come up ahead after 8/1 as long as both providers count their channels using the same exact standards.


----------



## fikuserectus (Aug 19, 2006)

Steve Robertson said:


> This has been going on for years on these message boards it really is comical


Yup!! In other words. Fanboys are idiots. Not just DBS fanboys, but console, OS, and Phone fanboys as well.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> No matter which standards of counting one uses (including or not including PPVs, including or not including part time game only RSNs, including or not including full time HD RSNs, including or not including DNSs) Direct still will come up ahead after 8/1 as long as both providers count their channels using the same exact standards.


This is a false statement. If you use the WFN standard of counting, Dish is clearly ahead of DirecTV. This is probably the best standard to use, and only DirecTV fanboys would be opposed to it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Jeremy W said:


> This is a false statement. If you use the WFN standard of counting, Dish is clearly ahead of DirecTV. This is probably the best standard to use, and only DirecTV fanboys would be opposed to it.


Can the WFN standard be compared to the following standards?

MTV
VH1
CMT
TOON
Fuel
CBS CS


----------



## levibluewa (Aug 13, 2005)

but I can see half of the Directv subscribers leaving just to get the World Fishing Network HD


----------



## bigwad (Oct 19, 2006)

I'm just hoping I get my locals in HD BEFORE the new season starts. They've been telling me soon for an awful long time! Got my fingers crossed!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

All I know is that with 3 HD DVRs right now, as well as the 92, 95, or whatever number of HD channels DirecTV has now (depending on what kind of creative math one uses)....I have lots to watch. That said, when they fire up more National channels with D11 "soon" (there's that word again)....I won't have any time for anything else other than watching HD all day long .
...forget all that work and eating nonsense...


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

harsh said:


> Can the WFN standard be compared to the following standards?
> 
> MTV
> VH1
> ...


No sense of humor?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> No sense of humor?


I hear that watching too much Dish network reduces the size of the laughing muscle. :lol:

Perhaps it would be prudent to get back to the OP...which is what and when.

The answer is YES, there will be more HD and "soon", as in within the next 60 days or so.....both more HD LILs will be activated, as well as National HD channels.

In a nutshell....lots to look forward to and not long to wait.


----------



## bigwad (Oct 19, 2006)

Is there any updated lists around that have projected dates for LiL's and the areas they are activating? They used to have a list somewhere, but I think they got rid of it because the dates were not accurate. Roanoke/Lynchburg is somewhere down the list in market share, but I have seen some activated that I think are much further down the list.


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

levibluewa said:


> but I can see half of the Directv subscribers leaving just to get the World Fishing Network HD


:lol: On a serious note, it's all about which provider has the channels you want and which provider has your locals in HD IMO.

I reserve the right to be wrong.


----------



## seltech (Feb 5, 2008)

harsh said:


> The flaw in DIRECTV's model is that all of their eggs are in one slot and there are no backups until well into next year. DISH has two widely spaced slots for most all of their HD programming. Given any view of the Southern sky at all, the hopeful subscriber's chances of seeing either 61.5W or 129W are substantially higher than seeing just the 101W area.


:lol: :nono:


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Radio Enginerd said:


> :lol: On a serious note, it's all about which provider has the channels you want and which provider has your locals in HD IMO.
> 
> I reserve the right to be wrong.


Yep, that's exactly the case. With DirecTV there are but a few channels left that I would want in HD that I don't already get and I hope will be carried when D11 goes live. I'm also looking forward to the day when MPEG2 channels are converted over.

At the end of the day it's not about channel counts it's about channels that count.®

Hey, how about that for a buzz slogan. ® Trademark pending, 2008, tcusta00. :lol:


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> Yep, that's exactly the case. With DirecTV there are but a few channels left that I would want in HD that I don't already get and I hope will be carried when D11 goes live. I'm also looking forward to the day when MPEG2 channels are converted over.
> 
> At the end of the day it's not about channel counts it's about channels that count.®
> 
> Hey, how about that for a buzz slogan. ® Trademark pending, 2008, tcusta00. :lol:


yes. it's the channels that count, not the channel count. what channels do you want?


----------



## admiral39 (Nov 7, 2006)

tcusta00 said:


> Yep, that's exactly the case. With DirecTV there are but a few channels left that I would want in HD that I don't already get and I hope will be carried when D11 goes live. I'm also looking forward to the day when MPEG2 channels are converted over.
> 
> At the end of the day it's not about channel counts it's about channels that count.®
> 
> Hey, how about that for a buzz slogan. ® Trademark pending, 2008, tcusta00. :lol:


Oh you are sooo hired! Forward your resume to the marketing department immediately! :biggthump


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

curt8403 said:


> what channels do you want?


Besides the MPEG2s... Travel, FNC, the rest of the premiums not yet in HD, PBS, More PPV HD, and BBCA. There may be a few more I'd watch, but these would be great. Then there are a bunch of SDs that I'd like HD for but aren't currently offered in HD and don't have content in HD anyway, like DIY.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

harsh said:


> Can the WFN standard be compared to the following standards?


At least the channels you listed are 24x7 channels, unlike the game-only RSNs that Dish counts and DirecTV doesn't.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

Dish claims to be the leader in HD with 80 channels. I think Directv has more. 
Dish must have been advised to claim to be the leader by their lawyers (Wee, Cheetum and Howe)


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> Besides the MPEG2s... *Travel*, FNC, the rest of the *premiums not yet in HD*,* PBS,* More PPV HD, and *BBCA.* There may be a few more I'd watch, but these would be great. Then there are a bunch of SDs that I'd like HD for but aren't currently offered in HD and don't have content in HD anyway, like DIY.


I would be very content with that.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> Besides the MPEG2s... Travel, FNC, the rest of the premiums not yet in HD, PBS, More PPV HD, and BBCA. There may be a few more I'd watch, but these would be great. Then there are a bunch of SDs that I'd like HD for but aren't currently offered in HD and don't have content in HD anyway, like DIY.


hmm I told Directv what channels you want.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Jeremy W said:


> At least the channels you listed are 24x7 channels, unlike the game-only RSNs that Dish counts and DirecTV doesn't.


As you may have noticed, they are 24/7 HD channels with no HD. OTOH, WFN has met my proposed magic number of at least 20% HD every day.


----------



## PeterB (Jul 25, 2002)

harsh said:


> Can the WFN standard be compared to the following standards?
> 
> MTV
> VH1
> ...


Toon does have some HD programming, some of the adult swim stuff, like the Venture Brothers, is HD.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

There's a _FISHING_ network?

What's next, a _knitting_ network?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

n3ntj said:


> There's a _FISHING_ network?
> 
> What's next, a _knitting_ network?


You're confusing this all with the former Voom channels...they also had the Paint drying channel and the Grass growing channel... 

Seriously though....once the bandwidth is active (the D11 new satellite in place soon) ....expect to see more and more HD channels as we go through the months ahead...


----------



## ChrisPC (Jun 17, 2003)

D* is now advertising 130 HD channels coming "this summer". There's been an ad on Fox, and the All-Star Game announcer mentioned it also.


----------



## CoachGibbs (May 23, 2007)

PeterB said:


> Toon does have some HD programming, some of the adult swim stuff, like the Venture Brothers, is HD.


Unless things have changed in the past couple weeks (possible I haven't had much time to pay attention) your statement is not true.


----------



## PeterB (Jul 25, 2002)

CoachGibbs said:


> Unless things have changed in the past couple weeks (possible I haven't had much time to pay attention) your statement is not true.


Its true. Here is a quote from the creator's blog:

http://jacksonpublick.livejournal.com/



> Other than that, production's going pretty well. A little bit behind schedule, as always, but everyone is turning out great work. We're presently designing ep. 39, editing the animatic and coloring for ep. 33, storyboarding eps. 37 & 38, and we're set to record ep. 36 this week. I'm looking forward to being a full-time director and having my nights free for a while, but post-production will be starting up in about a month and a half, when we start seeing footage from Korea--screengrabs of which I'll undoubtedly post when the time comes. We've never edited HD footage before (did I mention The Venture Bros. is being made in HD this season?), so it should be interesting and full of unforseen technical dilemmas.


He makes several references to HD production on his blog, i've watched the show, it sure as hell isn't in stretch-o-vision SD.


----------



## jtm (Dec 14, 2006)

*PBS HD. Please!*


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

PeterB said:


> i've watched the show, it sure as hell isn't in stretch-o-vision SD.


You sure as hell are being fooled if you think it's in HD. I've checked out the show, because I had heard it was being produced in HD and I wanted to see if it would actually be broadcast that way. It never has been broadcast in HD, it's pure stretch-o-vision. Don't feel bad, it fools a lot of people.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Uhm you guys said hell! 

No fool'n though, we're going to get more HD very soon, some will be bad representations of programs that where never captured in HD format changed to HD transmited, ah, stuff.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

smiddy said:


> Uhm you guys said hell!
> 
> No fool'n though, we're going to get more HD very soon, some will be bad representations of programs that where never captured in HD format changed to HD transmited, ah, stuff.


Yup.

In fact...as the number of *real *HD Channels grow...the cheesier ones will stand out as inferior all the more. They'll see the impact in ratings for sure. :eek2:


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup.
> 
> In fact...as the number of *real *HD Channels grow...the cheesier ones will stand out as inferior all the more. They'll see the impact in ratings for sure. :eek2:


That is pretty clear progression, but I would add that in order to survive they those inferior products will have to change their programming. If they have the means, all they need is the will to produce.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

smiddy said:


> That is pretty clear progression, but I would add that in order to survive they those inferior products will have to change their programming. If they have the means, all they need is the will to produce.


That's the beauty of removing channels from the Favorites list....


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That's the beauty of removing channels from the Favorites list....


There's a Favorites list? :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

smiddy said:


> There's a Favorites list? :lol:


Looks like someone will need to attend the remedial HD DVR class before they can accept D11 transmissions...


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Looks like someone will need to attend the remedial HD DVR class before they can accept D11 transmissions...


Ah man, no fair!  Wha!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

smiddy said:


> Ah man, no fair!  Wha!


HD DVR 101.....you're already signed up young man...


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> HD DVR 101.....you're already signed up young man...


Thanks, but is there a boot camp, where I can get the full enchalada of training? I want it all!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

smiddy said:


> Thanks, but is there a boot camp, where I can get the full enchalada of training? I want it all!


Perhaps you might want to think about reading the manual???


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Perhaps you might want to think about reading the manual???


The manual I have talks about confusing things like "My VOD" and has a completely different looking (Quick) Menu layout than my DVR has...


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> The manual I have talks about confusing things like "My VOD" and has a completely different looking (Quick) Menu layout than my DVR has...


Good Point! At the time of writing those where the likely intentions but things have changed and will continue to change!


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

smiddy said:


> Good Point! At the time of writing those where the likely intentions but things have changed and will continue to change!


At the time of writing, that's how the software looked. Thankfully, we've come a long way!


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> The manual I have talks about confusing things like "My VOD" and has a completely different looking (Quick) Menu layout than my DVR has...


I still have that manual as well. I have no idea why I even keep it.

The only thing I used the manual for was throwing it at the HR20 when it first came out. Those were different times for sure.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> At the time of writing, that's how the software looked. Thankfully, we've come a long way!


Yep, but hopefully we go a lot further, especially in hte area of screen use efficiency.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

smiddy said:


> Yep, but hopefully we go a lot further, especially in hte area of screen use efficiency.


Well, it's looking like we'll be seeing the long-awaited HD GUI in 2009. That's the #2 thing I want to see, with MRV at #1.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Yeah, I saw that HD GUI update announcement, that is exciting. Once MRV happens, I can add the eSATA drives.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Radio Enginerd said:


> I still have that manual as well. I have no idea why I even keep it.


Two very good reasons  :

1) It keeps the kitchen table level with that wobbly leg on the one side
2) Its part of the "package" you'd have to send back in the event of any equipment return to DirecTV in the future.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Two very good reasons  :
> 
> 1) It keeps the kitchen table level with that wobbly leg on the one side
> 2) Its part of the "package" you'd have to send back in the event of any equipment return to DirecTV in the future.


If DirecTV wanted the manual back, which I doubt they would, and I didn't have it, I'd create one out of a sheet of paper and simply put User's Manual on the top sheet and on the back, end of manual.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Its part of the "package" you'd have to send back in the event of any equipment return to DirecTV in the future.


They don't want the manual back.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Jeremy W said:


> They don't want the manual back.


I thought not....just trying to make excuses for why we might keep it. :lol:


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

smiddy said:


> If DirecTV wanted the manual back, which I doubt they would, and I didn't have it, I'd create one out of a sheet of paper and simply put User's Manual on the top sheet and on the back, end of manual.


:lol:

Yeah, I'd send them a re-write and ask for royalties when they go to distribute.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Radio Enginerd said:


> :lol:
> 
> Yeah, I'd send them a re-write and ask for royalties when they go to distribute.


Perhaps online help that may be kept more current is another approach...


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Radio Enginerd said:


> :lol:
> 
> Yeah, I'd send them a re-write and ask for royalties when they go to distribute.


(C) 2008 Radio Enginerd. All Rights Reserved, unless of course you make any money on it, then I will not be very reserved.

Something like that? :lol:


----------

