# Give people the option of higher quality DODs PLEASE!!



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

DOD is really neat, BUT I am VERY disappointed with the quality of SOME of the content. Granted given many peoples internet connection that may be slow, some people may want to have very compressed content, but give people the option for high quality downloads. I find the quality for children’s shows like Barney, Thomas and Friends, and Dora is good (at least for that kind of content) Now I am streaming The Sixth Sense on STARZ on demand and the quality looks like a 20 year old video tape of a show from WTBS from 1987 recorded on the slow speed (Way too blurry!) STARZ on the demand is pretty cool except that is looks like it’s about 240P (as if such a standard existed!)

Give people the option for HD quality (same quality as STARZ HD or HDNET ect.). Then offer people shows on these stations that are necessarily being show that month on the standard station. I would be willing to let the thing download for 7 hours (or longer) if at the end I get high quality HD movie. Granted some people may want to watch now, give them the low quality options (if their internet is too slow), but for the rest of us give us the quality option PLEASE!!!!


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> DOD is really neat, BUT I am VERY disappointed with the quality of SOME of the content. Granted given many peoples internet connection that may be slow, some people may want to have very compressed content, but give people the option for high quality downloads. I find the quality for children's shows like Barney, Thomas and Friends, and Dora is good (at least for that kind of content) Now I am streaming The Sixth Sense on STARZ on demand and the quality looks like a 20 year old video tape of a show from WTBS from 1987 recorded on the slow speed (Way too blurry!) STARZ on the demand is pretty cool except that is looks like it's about 240P (as if such a standard existed!)
> 
> Give people the option for HD quality (same quality as STARZ HD or HDNET ect.). Then offer people shows on these stations that are necessarily being show that month on the standard station. I would be willing to let the thing download for 7 hours (or longer) if at the end I get high quality HD movie. Granted some people may want to watch now, give them the low quality options (if their internet is too slow), but for the rest of us give us the quality option PLEASE!!!!


It is not completed with content yet it is a BETA! It is not DirecTV's fault you have a lousy connection via your ISP.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

jtn said:


> It is not completed with content yet it is a BETA! It is not DirecTV's fault you have a lousy connection via your ISP.


Your comment makes no sense what so ever. I have a 10Mps internet, I can download a 2 hour starz on Demand movie in about 40 minutes. (I can play anything real time with the current quality they offer) The quality has nothing to do with internet connection. It has to do with how much they compress the signal.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

I'd just love to see any DOD HD. You'll hear "it's still a beta". Even more of a point that we should have DOD HD now! I just don't get it. I'm checking everyday for DOD HD content. Everyday I'm letdown.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

Hutchinshouse said:


> I'd just love to see any DOD HD. You'll hear "it's still a beta". Even more of a point that we should have DOD HD now! I just don't get it. I'm checking everyday for DOD HD content. Everyday I'm letdown.


Agreed, many of us have paid anywhere from $1500 to $4000 for our HD TV's, why would we want to watch that low quality sh!#! that Starz on Demand has. Makes me want to puke. That being said, some stuff like Barney, Dora the Explorer and Thomas and Friends seems fine for my 2 year old for that kinds of content, looks comparable to whats normally on Sprout.

Some some stuff on Discovery on Demand looks watchable for that kind of content like Dirty Jobs, but give us the Quality option PLEASE. Otherwise DOD is only a toy to play with, not a compelling option for movie watching. I watched some Big Ten Network stuff, and the DOD is awful, I've seen similiar quality talking to my dad on our web cam through MSN messenger!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I wonder if this DoD content is generated specifically for D* or it's what the channels provide to all companies, D*, Comcast, Time Warner, Cablevision, etc. It could be this is what the majority of the distribution channels have asked for and this is what D* gets, might be out of their control.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> Your comment makes no sense what so ever. I have a 10Mps internet, I can download a 2 hour starz on Demand movie in about 40 minutes. (I can play anything real time with the current quality they offer) The quality has nothing to do with internet connection. It has to do with how much they compress the signal.


It is recommended that you have a minimum of 100 Mbps per DirecTV. 
Since you will be using the same connection for internet while surfing the web etc.
Until you are ready for BETA, I think you should wait.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

RAD said:


> I wonder if this DoD content is generated specifically for D* or it's what the channels provide to all companies, D*, Comcast, Time Warner, Cablevision, etc. It could be this is what the majority of the distribution channels have asked for and this is what D* gets, might be out of their control.


That is a very good point. But I think, DirecTV needs to take the lead on this, just like they seem to be taking the lead on HD / mpeg4. Offer people high quality downloads any website that has streaming videos offers different bandwidths and DoD's should be the same. Its idiotic that they would go with a product offering lower quality SD than normal. Bandwidth is out there, so offer people the option for high quality. Even if its not DirecTV I should be griping at, but at least lets let our displeasure with the low quality be heard on these forums!


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

jtn said:


> It is recommended that you have a minimum of 100 Mbps per DirecTV.
> Since you will be using the same connection for internet while surfing the web etc.
> Until you are ready for BETA, I think you should wait.


:nono:


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> :nono:


Okay you wont get it with 10 Mbps. Sorry nothing personal, but maybe listen and learn.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jtn said:


> It is recommended that you have a minimum of 100 Mbps per DirecTV.


Where do you come up with some of this stuff?

As per http://www.directv.com/dod/dod.html : _"Broadband Internet service with a minimum connection speed of 750 Kbps or higher (DSL or cable) "_


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

RAD said:


> Where do you come up with some of this stuff?
> 
> As per http://www.directv.com/dod/dod.html : _"Broadband Internet service with a minimum connection speed of 750 Kbps or higher (DSL or cable) "_


Factor your other devices. Let's not be cheap. The fact you are so quick with responding clarifies you need so much bandwidth to work. Update. If you have the money to buy and HR2* Then get the right internet connection. It's not to make you mad, but to make it work for you.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

jtn said:


> Okay you wont get it with 10 Mbps. Sorry nothing personal, but maybe listen and learn.


My network is 100Mbps ethernet (hard wired through my router)

My internet provider is 10Mbps which is very fast for cable modem,

:hurah: 
:hurah: 
YOU ARE TOTALLY CLUELESS TO MY POINT? 
:hurah: 
:hurah:

Even IF I had a slow provider I wouldnt mind waiting for the download and watch the movie the next day as long as it was high quality. As it is now I can watching anything theY offer live with a lot of bandwith to spare.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> My network is 100Mbps ethernet (hard wired through my router)
> 
> My internet provider is 10Mbps which is very fast for cable modem,
> 
> ...


Sorry to let you know that you won't have luck until your ISP is providing you to your modem a 100 Mbps connection as suggested by DirecTV for models HR2*.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> Bandwidth is out there, so offer people the option for high quality.


I think a couple of things come into play here. Since we're talking about various internet connection speeds at folks homes, anywhere from D*'s minumum recommendation of 768Kbps up to the FIOS folks with >10Mbps they need to strike a balance of quality vs. size of the files and how long it takes to download. We're already seeing people complain about how long it takes now, increasing the quality would make that worst.

The second thing is that D* isn't charging extra for DoD (unless it's a chargable PPV), so this feature is costing them money for hosting all this content and pushing it out on the net. If they had higher quality on DoD then they're talking more storage space at the hosting site(s) again costing D* more money.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

jtn said:


> Sorry to let you know that you won't have luck until your ISP is providing you to your modem a 100 Mbps connection as suggested by DirecTV for models HR2*.


Okay you are trying to be funny, maybe it was me being clueless


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jtn said:


> Factor your other devices. Let's not be cheap. The fact you are so quick with responding clarifies you need so much bandwidth to work. Update. If you have the money to buy and HR2* Then get the right internet connection. It's not to make you mad, but to make it work for you.


No, you said that D* says you need a 100Mbps connection which was not correct. The vast majorty of people can't get 100Mbps connections at home, DSL is usually 3Mbps to 6Mbps max, cable 4Mbps to 7Mbps.

Now if you're talking about your home internal network that's different but it's still not going to make much of a difference since the lowest common demoninator is still going to be your ISP connection.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

RAD said:


> I think a couple of things come into play here. Since we're talking about various internet connection speeds at folks homes, anywhere from D*'s minumum recommendation of 768Kbps up to the FIOS folks with >10Mbps they need to strike a balance of quality vs. size of the files and how long it takes to download. We're already seeing people complain about how long it takes now, increasing the quality would make that worst.
> 
> The second thing is that D* isn't charging extra for DoD (unless it's a chargable PPV), so this feature is costing them money for hosting all this content and pushing it out on the net. If they had higher quality on DoD then they're talking more storage space at the hosting site(s) again costing D* more money.


I know what you are saying is true, maybe make people pay for quality, that is fine, but at least have the option out there. (5 or 10$ per month charge to access quality downloads) limit people to 3Mbps or something like that, so and HD movie may take a day to download (if you choose the high quality option.) But give people the option, otherwise to people who prefer quality the content is not a compelling choice.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> Okay you are trying to be funny, maybe it was me being clueless


I can't be there to hold you by the hand and neither can anyone else, if you don't have the right setup forget it. Funny or not. It's nobodies fault but your own.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

RAD said:


> No, you said that D* says you need a 100Mbps connection which was not correct. The vast majorty of people can't get 100Mbps connections at home, DSL is usually 3Mbps to 6Mbps max, cable 4Mbps to 7Mbps.
> 
> Now if you're talking about your home internal network that's different but it's still not going to make much of a difference since the lowest common demoninator is still going to be your ISP connection.


I have tested less than 100, older routers don't have the ability, and do not cut it, so go ahead and waste your time, I could care less. :grin:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

jtn said:


> I have tested less than 100, older routers don't have the ability, and do not cut it, so go ahead and waste your time, I could care less. :grin:


NP, you have your opinion, I have mine. I saw all your posts from the problems you had getting your DoD working and based on those I don't hold you as a network expert. I've just added you to my ignore list, suggest that you do the same for me.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

RAD said:


> NP, you have your opinion, I have mine. I saw all your posts from the problems you had getting your DoD working and based on those I don't hold you as a network expert. I've just added you to my ignore list, suggest that you do the same for me.


Yes I said I had an 10mbps router that could not cut it, and bought a new one that could do the job. That's all I'm saying here. Ignore me all you want to, you know I'm right!


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

jtn said:


> I have tested less than 100, older routers don't have the ability, and do not cut it, so go ahead and waste your time, I could care less. :grin:


You've lost me, and I'm trying to understand your last few posts, but I'm not getting it...

You're suggesting that to make VOD work correctly, you have to have a 100mbps connection from your ISP?

What ISP are you going to get that connection from? AT&T offers 6MBps down DSL... Covad, for business, offers 15MBps down... Fios offers 30mbps down...

I've got only a 3mbps DSL connection, and I can download anything on VOD just fine. If I give it a 5 minute head start, I can watch "real time" and not catch up to the download.

And D* recommends a minimum 768k connection.... Why are you recommending a jump to 100mbps?

Please, enlighten me.

Are you referring to your inside network... suggesting that VOD won't work if you're running a 10Mbit network... it requires 100mbit (or 1000mbit)?


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> You've lost me, and I'm trying to understand your last few posts, but I'm not getting it...
> 
> You're suggesting that to make VOD work correctly, you have to have a 100mbps connection from your ISP?
> 
> ...


Inside as you and DirecTV mentioned. I have tested 10mbps routers, and they will not work, sorry, but I did not make it this way, if the router you buy can handle 100 or higher it will be fine. Keep in mind it factors on the quantity of devices on the home network which all are demanding that bandwidth at the same time. ISP, like cable do not limit you to less than 100mbps.

Check out this URL that Comcast uses to verify download quality:
http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/

I get over 21mb a second download, plenty for downloading VOD, what do you get?


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> You've lost me, and I'm trying to understand your last few posts, but I'm not getting it...
> 
> You're suggesting that to make VOD work correctly, you have to have a 100mbps connection from your ISP?
> 
> ...


jtn's posts are off topic. This thread is about whether people are satisfied with the quality of the DOD's or not provided by directv.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

The video quality of the DOD videos has nothing to do with your internet connection speed. That speed just determines how quickly they'll download. The video quality is determined by the MPEG compression factors used to compress the original video files, either by the content provider or by DirecTV.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> jtn's posts are off topic. This thread is about whether people are satisfied with the quality of the DOD's or not provided by directv.


BETA is not final and off topic.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> The video quality of the DOD videos has nothing to do with your internet connection speed. That speed just determines how quickly they'll download. The video quality is determined by the MPEG compression factors used to compress the original video files, either by the content provider or by DirecTV.


I wish that were true, then why did I have to buy a new router?
Your saying the old 10mbps routers that are nearly 10 years old work?

I say no.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

jtn said:


> I wish that were true, then why did I have to buy a new router?
> Your saying the old 10mbps routers that are nearly 10 years old work?
> 
> I say no.


No, that's not what I'm saying. It's quite likely that your old 10mbps router did not work for your successful connections to DOD. I'm just saying that router/internet speed has nothing to do with the video quality of the DOD files. That's what the original poster was asking about. You've taken this thread off track jtn.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> No, that's not what I'm saying. It's quite likely that your old 10mbps router did not work for your successful connections to DOD. I'm just saying that router/internet speed has nothing to do with the video quality of the DOD files. That's what the original poster was asking about. You've taken this thread off track jtn.


I think you need to read again, 7 hour downloads, he must not be using the correct router as suggested by DirecTV, here is his quote:



EFGFE36TWGOU4 said:


> DOD is really neat, BUT I am VERY disappointed with the quality of SOME of the content. Granted given many peoples internet connection that may be slow, some people may want to have very compressed content, but give people the option for high quality downloads. I find the quality for children's shows like Barney, Thomas and Friends, and Dora is good (at least for that kind of content) Now I am streaming The Sixth Sense on STARZ on demand and the quality looks like a 20 year old video tape of a show from WTBS from 1987 recorded on the slow speed (Way too blurry!) STARZ on the demand is pretty cool except that is looks like it's about 240P (as if such a standard existed!)
> 
> Give people the option for HD quality (same quality as STARZ HD or HDNET ect.). Then offer people shows on these stations that are necessarily being show that month on the standard station. I would be willing to let the thing download for 7 hours (or longer) if at the end I get high quality HD movie. Granted some people may want to watch now, give them the low quality options (if their internet is too slow), but for the rest of us give us the quality option PLEASE!!!!


I don't think he is getting any downloads with the outdated router he is using, other than to aggravate.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

All I can say the programming may be limited, but will be expanded, and large SD programs download very fast for me while I surf the net and try to help at DBStalk. So if you don't like me, fine hate my guts I don't give a damn.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

jtn said:


> I think you need to read again, 7 hour downloads, he must not be using the correct router as suggested by DirecTV, here is his quote:


You've just verified my point .... router performance only affects internet download speed. It has *nothing *to do with the resulting video quality of the downloaded file.

Time for me to move along now.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> You've just verified my point .... router performance only affects internet download speed. It has *nothing *to do with the resulting video quality of the downloaded file.
> 
> Time for me to move along now.


Litz you have not used anything but atleast a router with a capacity for 100mbps, so you are not helping go ahead and leave now.

Litz before you leave give a model of a router that at 10mbps that actually works with DirecTV.... Thank you.


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

jtn said:


> Litz you have not used anything but atleast a router with a capacity for 100mbps, so you are not helping go ahead and leave now.
> 
> Litz before you leave give a model of a router that at 10mbps that actually works with DirecTV.... Thank you.


You're completely missing the point.

First off, no one ever said they HAD 7 hour downloads. The comment was that if he could get high quality VOD downloads, he would gladly LET IT DOWNLOAD for 7 hours. As would I.

Second, the quality of VOD is what it is.. You're downloading a static file, it doesn't compress more for a slower connection... Connection Speed and Quality are completely unrelated.... The only relation would be that an increase in quality would result in an increase in file size, which would in turn mean longer downloads... and the slower your connection the longer the download. But it does not affect, in the least, the quality of the show which you download.

I allowed myself to get sucked off track by your connection speed posts earlier... but that's really NOT what this discussion is about. The complaint is about the quality of the downloads. And requesting that there be an option to download higher quality shows... Like when you go to a news site and you have a LO/MED/HIGH option when downloading a video. The same concept applies here - allow VODers to download the size file that they're comfortable with, based on how long it will take to download given their connection speed and the quality of show they want to watch.

The OP pointed out that if he's watching Dirty Jobs, the quality is "good enough", but he doesn't want to download a STARZ movie and have it look like crap..


----------



## quickfire (Nov 14, 2003)

WOW JTN...you have posted 829 times since becoming a member on OCT.18th 2007.........nuff said


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> You're completely missing the point.
> 
> First off, no one ever said they HAD 7 hour downloads. The comment was that if he could get high quality VOD downloads, he would gladly LET IT DOWNLOAD for 7 hours. As would I.
> 
> ...


NO you are missing the point, VOD is working fine, but for a few plants, or critics who can never be satisfied now matter how well it works.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

quickfire said:


> WOW JTN...you have posted 829 times since becoming a member on OCT.18th 2007.........nuff said


Your an idiot if you think the number of helping suggestions is a factor. You are not as bright, and maybe jealous, but I could don't care.


----------



## quickfire (Nov 14, 2003)

I putting you on my ignore list also....your to cocky and THINk you know it all......the point is the download speed has nothing to do with video quality!!!


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

quickfire said:


> I putting you on my ignore list also....your to cocky and THINk you know it all......the point is the download speed has nothing to do with video quality!!!


I don't care what you think or do. :lol:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

quickfire said:


> I putting you on my ignore list also


To bad that I end up getting an e-mail notificaion on the thread update when they post a response. It would be nice if ignore took notifications into account also. Hell, he's averaging more post per day then Earl is.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

RAD said:


> To bad that I end up getting an e-mail notificaion on the thread update when they post a response. It would be nice if ignore took notifications into account also.


:lol: :hurah:


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

jtn said:


> NO you are missing the point, VOD is working fine, but for a few plants, or critics who can never be satisfied now matter how well it works.


No one in this thread ever said VOD did not work. And yes, we all realize that it's a beta test. However, the point of beta testing is to get feedback from the people using it.

The feedback, from this thread, being that the quality of some shows leaves something to be desired. Obviously they need to compress programming to create files that are managable - since all VOD delivery is via the internet and relies on all of our varying connection speeds.

The feedback/request is that DirecTV would provide in it's VOD offerings the option to download higher quality shows. If the show quality is sub-par, then VOD becomes a trinket or toy. If they have high quality shows, then it becomes a viable option for actually watching shows. It's up to each user to decide where the line is that makes VOD viable vs. being a toy... The OPs point was that if the offerings are of the current quality, then for him, VOD is simply a toy.

Several of us agree with his assessment... ANd would fully be willing to let a show download overnight if it was high quality video.

Again, the complaint is not about the way it works, but the content offered, and the point of the thread is to relay to D* that if the content remains as it is now, then VOD is nothing more than a fun trinket.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> No one in this thread ever said VOD did not work. And yes, we all realize that it's a beta test. However, the point of beta testing is to get feedback from the people using it.
> 
> The feedback, from this thread, being that the quality of some shows leaves something to be desired. Obviously they need to compress programming to create files that are managable - since all VOD delivery is via the internet and relies on all of our varying connection speeds.
> 
> ...


Yes you have points, but DirecTV is not responsible for connection quality or competence of customers. They provide the ability, make suggestions on best use for best performance. You either follow suggestions or you do not. DBStalk has many suggestions, just do a search. It's not my own personal bias.


----------



## quickfire (Nov 14, 2003)

RAD said:


> To bad that I end up getting an e-mail notificaion on the thread update when they post a response. It would be nice if ignore took notifications into account also. Hell, he's averaging more post per day then Earl is.


I'm all for helping fellow members out as much as anyone..I'm sure JTN has good intentions but....you can't call people stupid and tell them to go away because they have different opinions than yours!!!GEEZ.........if JTN keeps this pace he'll have 10,000 post in less than a year...which is good if the post he makes HELP'S fellow member's


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

quickfire said:


> I'm all for helping fellow members out as much as anyone..I'm sure JTN has good intentions but....you can't call peole stupid and tell them to go away because they have different opinions than yours!!!GEEZ.....


quickfire, and the rest do not go away, I am trying to tell you that for best use, and to make things work for you, use a router that can handle atleast 100Mbps, thats is all. I have no bias at all, I want you to be happy and to get VOD!  Newer routers are better equipped for IRD/STB use.

I wish I could use my older router, but it didn't work, so I bought a new one as suggested by DBSTalk. Now things are fine.


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

jtn said:


> quickfire, and the rest do not go away, I am trying to tell you that for best use, and to make things work for you, use a router that can handle atleast 100Mbps, thats is all. I have no bias at all, I want you to be happy and to get VOD!  Newer routers are better equipped for IRD/STB use.
> 
> I wish I could use my older router, but it didn't work, so I bought a new one as suggested by DBSTalk. Now things are fine.


We understand that. However, it is off topic for this discussion. We're discussion whether the quality of VOD is acceptable or not - a discussion which has absolutely, 100% NOTHING to do with the speed of your connection, or the equipment you're using to attach to the network.

Please, if you want to discuss what equipment you need to properly run VOD, take it to another thread. This thread is to discuss whether the currently offered content on VOD is enough to make it a viable option for watching regular programming.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> We understand that. However, it is off topic for this discussion. We're discussion whether the quality of VOD is acceptable or not - a discussion which has absolutely, 100% NOTHING to do with the speed of your connection, or the equipment you're using to attach to the network.
> 
> Please, if you want to discuss what equipment you need to properly run VOD, take it to another thread. This thread is to discuss whether the currently offered content on VOD is enough to make it a viable option for watching regular programming.


It most certainly is with the proper equipment (i.e. router). Yes you can! 

To simply network is different from streaming or downloading video on demand I know this. With older routers you can network, but you cannot download video on demand.


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

jtn said:


> It most certainly is with the proper equipment (i.e. router). Yes you can!
> 
> To simply network is different from streaming or downloading video on demand I know this. With older routers you can network, but you cannot download video on demand.


All of us participating in this thread can download video on demand. We have fast networks and fast connections. That is NOT the point of this discussion.

Whether it takes 1 hour or 10 hours to download a file, the end result is the same program and it is NOT affected WHATSOEVER by the connection.

No one is complaining about the SPEED of video on demand. We are complaining the the QUALITY of the VIDEO downloaded is not up to par. Please, allow us to keep this discussion ON TOPIC... the topic being whether the quality of the video provided is acceptable.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> All of us participating in this thread can download video on demand. We have fast networks and fast connections. That is NOT the point of this discussion.
> 
> Whether it takes 1 hour or 10 hours to download a file, the end result is the same program and it is NOT affected WHATSOEVER by the connection.
> 
> No one is complaining about the SPEED of video on demand. We are complaining the the QUALITY of the VIDEO downloaded is not up to par. Please, allow us to keep this discussion ON TOPIC... the topic being whether the quality of the video provided is acceptable.


Okay I am sorry, but I have not experienced this. I am very impressed with the BETA thus far. I hope your experiences improve quickly. 

There is no difference in the quality of video I download versus satellite.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

Let me just jump in here to mention that this thread started out talking about quality of content not the delivery system. So let's please get back on topic.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

jdspencer said:


> Let me just jump in here to mention that this thread started out talking about quality of content not the delivery system. So let's please get back on topic.


Download quality = Satellite quality. Enough said based on my own experience, and taking suggestions from DBStalk.


----------



## OldRick (Oct 8, 2007)

Any router that does wifi will do 10mbps, as that is the base 802.11 ethernet standard that all routers will support. The minimum wifi speed will work fine for DTV, and will download as fast as the fastest 54mbps router.

The wifi speed of the router is irrelevant, as you will only be using a maximum of 2mbps, due to the speed DTV supplies.

A 100 mbps router will do nothing any faster, regarding VOD.

A broadband line any faster than 2mbps won't help either, as DTV throttles your speed to maximum 2mbps.

Neither is related to the degree of compression that DTV chooses to use, which is the sole determinant of the video quality.

jtn does have a habit of going instantly off-topic and ignoring both facts and what others have actually written, as this thread clearly demonstrates. IMHO, he could stand to do more studying before spouting off.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

OldRick said:


> Any router that does wifi will do 10mbps, as that is the base 802.11 ethernet standard that all routers will support. The minimum wifi speed will work fine for DTV, and will download as fast as the fastest 54mbps router.
> 
> The wifi speed of the router is irrelevant, as you will only be using a maximum of 2mbps, due to the speed DTV supplies.
> 
> ...


My broadband is much higher than what you say, and I regret others cannot get it as good, but that is neither my problem or DirecTV. Can any other carrier do better for you? I think not. So stop with the witch hunt, I know I ticked you off OldDick.

VOD quality BETA = Satellite quality. Hope it does for you, DirecTV is not picking on anyone. It's your job to get your Internet up to standards.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

jtn said:


> Download quality = Satellite quality. Enough said based on my own experience, and taking suggestions from DBStalk.


And, what does that have to do with the original topic? I'm done now. :grin:


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

jdspencer said:


> And, what does that have to do with the original topic? I'm done now. :grin:


You hung on longer than I could


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

jdspencer said:


> And, what does that have to do with the original topic? I'm done now. :grin:


jd it's alright to speak your opinion, and it's okay for me also.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

Okay, you sucked me in one more time. 

I have no problem with you expressing your opinion, it would just be nice if it had something to do with the original topic.


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

jdspencer said:


> Okay, you sucked me in one more time.
> 
> I have no problem with you expressing your opinion, it would just be nice if it had something to do with the original topic.


JD it does, really it does.


----------



## OldRick (Oct 8, 2007)

> Download quality = Satellite quality.


This is not correct in any way. The video quality you will see in any downloaded VoD will be much worse, i.e. more compressed, than what you will see on the better channels from the satellite, e.g. HDNet.

DTV compresses (synonymous with "throws away detail") in all of its content to suit the audience size, the specific channel, time of day, and other reasons, most of which are related to who is paying for better quality.

A sat. broadcast of the same movie will have better or worse video quality depending on when and on what DTV channel you see it. This is true for both SD and HD content on DTV, and for MPEG2 as well as the newer MPEG4 compression.

When a video is prepared for loading onto an Internet server for VoD download, it will be compressed to a much greater degree than for most broadcast sat. channels, simply because the file sizes would be far too large for downloading for 99% of the US audience. Here in reality, broadband Internet bandwidth is very limited and costly compared to satellite bandwidth.

So the bottom line is that at this time you will always see better quality on a first-run satellite broadcast than on VoD, and the worst sat. channel will probably be better quality than the best downloaded video.

I'd guess that DTV will choose to provide better quality (less compression) for PPV content, but download times will be much, much longer for good quality or HD content.

And, jtn, you are plainly among the totally clueless regarding the Internet, networking, and VoD. Give it up...


----------



## jtn (Oct 18, 2007)

OldRick said:


> This is not correct in any way. The video quality you will see in any downloaded VoD will be much worse, i.e. more compressed, than what you will see on the better channels from the satellite, e.g. HDNet.
> 
> DTV compresses (synonymous with "throws away detail") in all of its content to suit the audience size, the specific channel, time of day, and other reasons, most of which are related to who is paying for better quality.
> 
> ...


Well that is according to you, but many moderators and members beg to differ with you.


----------



## west5648 (Oct 13, 2007)

jtn said:


> Well that is according to you, but many moderators and members beg to differ with you.


Well this is all pretty much a stupid argument. For one, you are downloading the exact same file as everyone else in the nation is, I dont think they are sorting better quality files to people with 20+ mbps connections. I think not. So it doesn't matter what speed you are downloading it at, IT'S THE SAME FILE, same quality as everyone else has. So as everyone else has tried to do, but couldn't hammer it into your head, higher download speeds do not improve your video quality.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

I am going to try to get back to the topic because it is interesting.

Old Rick's assumptions aside, has anyone measured the file sizes to see if the programming from download is significantly (or even at all) smaller than the SAME programming from satellite? My experience is that the downloaded stuff looks about the same as satellite for the same program/movie on the same channel. (I saw a mention of MPEG4...that is HD stuff and On Demand is doing zero HD at this point.)

You could ask that DirecTV actually *increase* the quality of the SD download above that of the satellite data but that is unlikely to happen and is the PQ may or may not be adjusted by DirecTV at all (do we know?).

As for the amount of HD content. Saying this is beta is not the real answer. Because HD always follows SD in on demand implementations. When I first got my Comcast HD box, the on demand had some HD (it had started just before the time I got the HD box....it was SD only at one point). The HD content has grown (we are talking about a year and a half) to the point where it is pretty good but still a fraction of the SD content. I know Fios started its on demand without HD and I think they still do not have any at all. (What is the status for Dish on Demand?)

On Demand for D* is very new. So new there is not a fully supported production release yet. Not one. So, a lack of HD content does not surprise me. When ramping something up like this they have to build the capability as well as the library. SD is a good starting point as everyone can access it and the file sizes are smaller, not to mention the content is readily available.

I, for one, am willing to give them time. If we see no growth over 6 months or so, then we can criticize. But even now, we have seen an addition of programming (BTN, for example), so we know they are not stagnating. The PQ will mean little to me until HD is fully available, so I am willing to wait.


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

tonyd79 said:


> has anyone measured the file sizes to see if the programming from download is significantly (or even at all) smaller than the SAME programming from satellite? My experience is that the downloaded stuff looks about the same as satellite for the same program/movie on the same channel. (I saw a mention of MPEG4...that is HD stuff and On Demand is doing zero HD at this point.)


I'd be willing to bet that the file sizes of the VOD downloads end up being pretty close to the sizes of content coming off of the sats. I did download the 2 HD programs that were available several weeks back and both looked just about as good as the current MPEG4 HD broadcasts, so I don't think we have much to worry about when it comes to HD VOD.

I do hope that D* is or will be offering SD VOD in full 640x480 though.


----------



## EFGFE36TWGOU4 (Nov 4, 2006)

PoitNarf said:


> I'd be willing to bet that the file sizes of the VOD downloads end up being pretty close to the sizes of content coming off of the sats. I did download the 2 HD programs that were available several weeks back and both looked just about as good as the current MPEG4 HD broadcasts, so I don't think we have much to worry about when it comes to HD VOD.
> 
> I do hope that D* is or will be offering SD VOD in full 640x480 though.


Maybe STARZ is worse than some other channels. That is the one that motivated me to post my concerns about quality. Watching some music videos tonight (I have them queued up like a juke box) and the quality does seem comparable to SD for some of these. I can't wait for HD though. (Until quality comes up, DoD is just a toy for me) Its potential is MUCH more than a toy. (Think a convergence of internet and TV) With all of the wonderful HD stations available from DTV, its hard to stomach SD these days.

I believe Video on Demand is going to become and important part of television viewing. They need huge libraries though, once the libraries become huge, it will probably be hard for us to remember what it was like before VOD. (by huge I mean millions, not thousands) Blu-Ray , DVD, HD-DVD, I think some day they will not be important, people will be able to purchase digital rights to new movies and store the movie remotely on some mega servers and wont have the need to own a disc. That day is not here yet, but it would make since (in my humble opinion) that is where things are going. Or maybe people subscribe to Starz, HBO , etc. and have access to their huge libraries so long as they keep the subscription active. But Libraries need to be huge and quality needs to be high, once this occurs, the first provider to offer this will rake in the dough with people coming over to that ship.

Come on DirecTV be a leader in this area, this will be your annuity for when that future hits. HD and large quantities of it on demand are the way to go.

Go DirecTV! Make it happen!


----------



## gulfwarvet (Mar 7, 2007)

jdspencer said:


> And, what does that have to do with the original topic? I'm done now. :grin:





litzdog911 said:


> You hung on longer than I could


i don't know about you guys, but by reading this thread i got a severe headache. :nono:


----------



## mikbro (Nov 9, 2007)

jtn said:


> With older routers you can network, but you cannot download video on demand.


Wow - jtn, I am afraid you really don't understand what you are talking about. At first I thought you were just trying to be difficult, but now I realize you must actually believe what you are saying .

On a purely technical level, the speed of you connection from the HR2x to the internet (regardless of what is between the two - as long as it is a reliable link) has nothing to do with the quality (read bitrate) of the content that you ultimately download.

I could connect to the internet via dialup modem and share that network connection w/my network and download movies all day, the quality of the movie won't change, just the amount of time it takes to download it.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

mikbro said:


> Wow - jtn, I am afraid you really don't understand what you are talking about. At first I thought you were just trying to be difficult, but now I realize you must actually believe what you are saying .
> 
> On a purely technical level, the speed of you connection from the HR2x to the internet (regardless of what is between the two - as long as it is a reliable link) has nothing to do with the quality (read bitrate) of the content that you ultimately download.
> 
> I could connect to the internet via dialup modem and share that network connection w/my network and download movies all day, the quality of the movie won't change, just the amount of time it takes to download it.


Careful .... don't get him started again :lol:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I think he's left here and gone over to SatGuys.


----------



## F1 Fan (Aug 28, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> I am going to try to get back to the topic because it is interesting.
> 
> Old Rick's assumptions aside, has anyone measured the file sizes to see if the programming from download is significantly (or even at all) smaller than the SAME programming from satellite? My experience is that the downloaded stuff looks about the same as satellite for the same program/movie on the same channel. (I saw a mention of MPEG4...that is HD stuff and On Demand is doing zero HD at this point.)
> 
> ...


Lets also remember that the backend for D* is also in beta not just our boxes. They need a fairly large sample base to work their figures. As someone mentioned earlier they are currently strangling their upload bandwidth per connection to 2Mb (I am taking their word on that). They are probably monitoring the download volume per hour before the commit to a full contract with their hardware providers to carry the full titles. SD gives them this figure based purely on SD - if they mixed in HD content they would have a far more complex calculation and maybe this is just easier while in Beta.

When it was a CE there were a couple of HD titles. Maybe there was a compression or upload/bandwidth problem that needs resolving.


----------



## Dusty (Sep 21, 2006)

The only reason I kept reading this thread is because of jtn.

Back to the original topic. I also hold the opinions that the current DoD quality is comparable to the SD programs from satellite. Right now, I actually prefer DoD kids shows over recording off Sprout because IMHO Sprout is among the worst quality SD channels. I think the DoD PQ is better.

I am taking programs from DoD only for those not available in HD anyway. For example, the Big Break is shot in SD and broadcasted in SD on VSGHD. I don't lose much quality to pull that show from DoD. From this perspective, I think the quality is actually OK. The question goes back to when we will see more HD programs on DoD than the two that I am sure all of us have watched. You can ask all you want. The answer will still be it's beta, which is not exactly an answer I am satisified. From my perspective, aside from user experience, D* needs to test if their server can handle higher traffic flow required by HD download. They can only test that if they put some HD programs on. I think more HD programs will happen during beta, when they are ready or feel like it.


----------

