# Viacom Networks ?



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

Viacom HD Networks this year or early next year?


----------



## bartendress (Oct 8, 2007)

DISH says they are coming soon.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

space86 said:


> Viacom HD Networks this year or early next year?


U-verse doesn't have any MTVN channnels in HD. I don't they exist except for Showime, TMC. I'm cancelling U-verse because their receivers are horrid!


----------



## dishlover2 (Aug 24, 2008)

bartendress said:


> DISH says they are coming soon.


ah maybe logo hd on dish that would be most cost feasible if they put that channel into the everythng pak and the whole 20 dolllar hd package the ultimate and that way by putting in the everything pak your not offending one demogious ics while at the same time another demographic wont have an excuse to migrate to direct tv or cable 4 logo

id like to see here not on a ppv basis like before on a per mo charge or included in hd ultimate

id love to see lifetime real women there too

ive repeated saying on another thread more hd the better id like it playboy in fact isnt in hd that i know of

charlie call playboy and say youd like to be able to offer playboyhd to my customers ha ha just halfway kidding there


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

dishlover2 said:


> ah maybe logo hd on dish that would be most cost feasible if they put that channel into the everythng pak


If you found enough subscribers willing to pay $14.99/month for Logo, I'm sure someone would be listening at DISH just as they heard the call for Playboy.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

space86 said:


> Viacom HD Networks this year or early next year?


Which ones in particular? Several of them aren't worth the ink to print their logo in the program lineup.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Paul Secic said:


> U-verse doesn't have any MTVN channnels in HD. I don't they exist except for Showime, TMC. I'm cancelling U-verse because their receivers are horrid!


So since U-Verse (and Dish) doesn't have those channels, they must not exist? 

For the second or third time, MTV HD, VH1 HD, CMT HD, Nick HD and Spike HD exist and are on DirecTV and have been for a year or more, and they been on Cablevision for about six months.

http://www.optimum.com/io/hdtv/hdtv_channels.jsp
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPageNR.jsp?assetId=3420007&footernavtype=-1

And BTW, Showtime and The Movie Channel are owned by CBS Corp, not Viacom.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Yes Steve, but are they all showing HD on a regular basis or are they still mostly upconverts?
When did MTV/VH1/CMT actually start to air HD? Certainly not a year ago.

Having a channel in the lineup so you can waste ink or pixels in the program guide is of little value if the content on that channel isn't what it claims to be ... in this case, _*HD*_.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Worth having and actually having are two different things. Paulie is convinced these channels don't exist, when in fact they do, how much real HD content is aired on these channels is another matter. The point is they exist, and just because they're not carried on U-Herse or in Chuckieland, doesn't mean they don't exist.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

If they are not airing HD they might as well not exist as a HD channel.
In other words, they don't exist in HD - only in "upconvert".

(Hopefully now a year has passed they do actually exist in HD as well.)


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Wow you're really going out on a limb here to, I don't know, discredit these channels since your Dish Network doesn't carry them. They exist as HD networks. Period. That is a fact. I guess some of them show very minimal HD content, but they are HD channels. What Paulie is saying is MTV HD does not exist, well it does. The channel exists, it may not show much HD content but it's there. Personally I don't want these channels on my cable system, even though a few are coming, I wouldn't watch many of them but I'd rather watch upconverted HD then SD.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I just asked a simple question ... are these really HD channels? If you're going to call any channel DirecTV uplinks in HD a "HD" channel you are just as bad as you're trying to paint me.

I buy a HD package so I get HD content ... not to watch upconverted content. I get pretty decent results upconverting SD to HD on my receiver - no need to spend bandwidth on channels without HD.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I was under the impression that the list of Viacom (MTV) channels that had some hd content were:

MTV (Standard-definition/high-definition channel)
Palladia (high-definition channel)
VH1 (Standard-definition/high-definition channel)
CMT (Standard-definition/high-definition channel)
Nickelodeon (Standard-definition/high-definition channel)
Spike TV (Standard-definition/high-definition channel)
I was also under the impression that those marked "(Standard-definition/high-definition channel)" at this time had about the same proportion of HD content as does TBS and WGN which means not much. Am I misinformed?

Of course, if you want the HD programming in HD, then you want it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steve Mehs said:


> Worth having and actually having are two different things.


Checking the HD content meter over at whereishd.com, we find the following:

MTV HD Ready (0%)
VH1 HD Ready (0%)
CMT 86%
Palladia 100%
Nick 4%
Spike 61%

Three are negligible and the other three are very good to excellent. These percentages measure only what programming is HD, not how much different HD programming is offered. The numbers are gleaned from programs marked as being in HD from the Zap2It database.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I'm impressed by CMT ... I would not have guessed that it was anywhere near that high.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Paul Secic said:


> U-verse doesn't have any MTVN channnels in HD. I don't they exist except for Showime, TMC. I'm cancelling U-verse because their receivers are horrid!


Wow Paul, I figured that might happen just not so quick, How many days did you have that cheapo uverse?


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> I'm impressed by CMT ... I would not have guessed that it was anywhere near that high.


I also had no idea. Now I want CMT HD.


----------



## HDRoberts (Dec 11, 2007)

2 cable networks (Cox Golf Coast and TWC New York) have announced that Comedy Central HD will be added in Dec. So add that to the list for Dish to get.

I am also highly suspect of the whereishd content meter.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

I saw that some of their statistics are being disputed right there on that site. At least there is some transparency.

I'd really like to see Comedy Central in HD. I wonder if Southpark is produced in 16:9 HD...


----------



## dishlover2 (Aug 24, 2008)

harsh said:


> If you found enough subscribers willing to pay $14.99/month for Logo, I'm sure someone would be listening at DISH just as they heard the call for Playboy.


5 dollars comes off if you have the four pay package here if it was offered for 10 dollars a month there would be takers as opposed to 3.95 per title


----------



## dishlover2 (Aug 24, 2008)

dishlover2 said:


> 5 dollars comes off if you have the four pay package here if it was offered for 10 dollars a month there would be takers as opposed to 3.95 per title


The difference being logo has commercials but so did mel allens sportschannel the former or current yankees owner


----------



## rocket69 (Oct 27, 2008)

Paul Secic said:


> U-verse doesn't have any MTVN channnels in HD. I don't they exist except for Showime, TMC. I'm cancelling U-verse because their receivers are horrid!


What .. How culd you not like ther $15 extra DVR recever .. No those ATT fools wont let you just get uvers for the net only you have to get the decrepit TV service..

DSLAM(Uvers) is a joke claming its fiber .. The fiber part is the same as Cable TV.. Its fiber to the local Node (Huge Box on the Block) Then distributed through the hood through you old 2 pair(RG11>RG6 for cable) that has existed since your home was built.....

I think il pay the extra $5 for the recever on sat service and only one DVR fee.


----------



## dishlover2 (Aug 24, 2008)

Steve Mehs said:


> So since U-Verse (and Dish) doesn't have those channels, they must not exist?
> 
> For the second or third time, MTV HD, VH1 HD, CMT HD, Nick HD and Spike HD exist and are on DirecTV and have been for a year or more, and they been on Cablevision for about six months.
> 
> ...


Viacom split up with westinghouse and other entities the company was rebranded cbs paramount televsion although now they have 50 percent stake in warner bros hence the cw tribune broadcasting is part of cbs too a 50/50 stake in each others stations

white westinghouses kyw 3 and wcau 10 almost got into a news duopoly running news at independence mall but nbc before universal merged with them nbc bought wcau nbc 10 for cash but rca/ge and (westinghouse although part of cbs on account of the paramount viacom merger)

cbs paramount owns showtime nick tmc logo etc

kyw that westinghouse owned among many others in the us was an nbc owned station it forced 10 wcau to switch nbc and vice for kyw 3 known as cbs3 in philadelphia today


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Steve Mehs said:


> So since U-Verse (and Dish) doesn't have those channels, they must not exist?
> 
> For the second or third time, MTV HD, VH1 HD, CMT HD, Nick HD and Spike HD exist and are on DirecTV and have been for a year or more, and they been on Cablevision for about six months.
> 
> ...


Stevie does TWC have BETJAZZ HD or BET Gospel HD?


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

From the view point of being a Dish HD Absolute customer, I'll take some of the Viacom HD channels even if not much of the content offered is in HD yet. If the channel is SD only I am not seeing it.

I certainly want Comedy Central HD. It is way past time for that network to go HD.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

phrelin said:


> I was under the impression that the list of Viacom (MTV) channels that had some hd content were:
> 
> MTV (Standard-definition/high-definition channel)
> Palladia (high-definition channel)
> ...


Palladia HD is, of course, already being carried by Dish.


----------



## cb7214 (Jan 25, 2007)

rocket69 said:


> What .. How culd you not like ther $15 extra DVR recever .. No those ATT fools wont let you just get uvers for the net only you have to get the decrepit TV service..
> 
> DSLAM(Uvers) is a joke claming its fiber .. The fiber part is the same as Cable TV.. Its fiber to the local Node (Huge Box on the Block) Then distributed through the hood through you old 2 pair(RG11>RG6 for cable) that has existed since your home was built.....
> 
> I think il pay the extra $5 for the recever on sat service and only one DVR fee.


The DVR is $15 extra ONLY if you take the lowest package of U100 any other package the DVR doesn't cost anything extra, also the U200 is exactly $15 more then then U100 so if you subsribe to the U100 and pay $15 for the DVR its silly not to upgrade to the U200 package and get more channels for the same price


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

cb7214 said:


> The DVR is $15 extra ONLY if you take the lowest package of U100 any other package the DVR doesn't cost anything extra, also the U200 is exactly $15 more then then U100 so if you subsribe to the U100 and pay $15 for the DVR its silly not to upgrade to the U200 package and get more channels for the same price


U-verse SUCKS big time. It's mostly their hardware.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Paul Secic said:


> U-verse SUCKS big time. It's mostly their hardware.


Sorry to hear that Paul. I thought it might increase your viewing options. But Echostar hardware is tough to beat.


----------



## paja (Oct 23, 2006)

Paul Secic said:


> U-verse SUCKS big time. It's mostly their hardware.


Just the opposite that I have found. I loved my 622 but my U-verse hd dvr is even better. I have had zero problems with it and it is even easier to use. As far as viewing options, I'm a movie lover and the lineup on U-verse blows DISH out of the water. For instance , I have 10 HD Cinemax channels.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

paja said:


> Just the opposite that I have found. I loved my 622 but my U-verse hd dvr is even better. I have had zero problems with it and it is even easier to use. As far as viewing options, I'm a movie lover and the lineup on U-verse blows DISH out of the water. For instance , I have 10 HD Cinemax channels.


Right. The box sputters and is hard to channels.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

paja said:


> Just the opposite that I have found. I loved my 622 but my U-verse hd dvr is even better. I have had zero problems with it and it is even easier to use. As far as viewing options, I'm a movie lover and the lineup on U-verse blows DISH out of the water. For instance , I have 10 HD Cinemax channels.


All of U-verse's premium channels are east and west feeds and to me it seems like decetive advertising. Equipment wise Dish is light years ahead of everybody!


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

Bobby H said:


> I certainly want Comedy Central HD. It is way past time for that network to go HD.


Absolutely.


----------



## space86 (May 4, 2007)

Question does the replacement satellite for 129 still launch this month?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Next Wednesday morning.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

James Long said:


> Next Wednesday morning.


Do you have any idea how long it takes one of those birds to get into the correct orbit? J/w.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I'd give it a month or two from launch to actual use.
A month would be pushing it to get it lined up and active ... but with the health of the current satellite DISH may just push it.


----------

