# Limited HD Programming



## dishhdwonderer (Jan 13, 2013)

True or False?

Does DISH Network regulate or limit the amount of air time of HD programming? I was told that DISH HD subscribers are really only receiving approximately 4 hours per day of HD programming.
:scratch:


----------



## mikeren1 (Sep 13, 2008)

wow


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

dishhdwonderer said:


> True or False?
> 
> Does DISH Network regulate or limit the amount of air time of HD programming? I was told that DISH HD subscribers are really only receiving approximately 4 hours per day of HD programming.
> :scratch:


I believe only the RSNs are part time with DISH. The national HD channels are full time.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

This seems like it is from way out of left field. Who would even start that kind of rumor? It is so absurdly wrong that even someone who hates Dish surely wouldn't be making that kind of thing up.

There are some non-full-time channels... but there are lots of full-time (or at least as full-time as they are anywhere else) full-time HD channels.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

Sounds like DISH is the subject of attacks by someone. There's a thread on General forum that's equally ridiculous. Maybe the broadcast networks have nothing better to do than get revenge for the Hopper? Maybe another satellite company? Or more likely an immature fool who needs to get out of his room and get a life.


----------



## ts7 (Nov 1, 2011)

Could be referring to Dish's compression. However if Dish is providing 4 hrs of full, uncompressed HD each day, I think that puts them ahead of other providers!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dishhdwonderer said:


> True or False?
> 
> Does DISH Network regulate or limit the amount of air time of HD programming? I was told that DISH HD subscribers are really only receiving approximately 4 hours per day of HD programming.
> :scratch:


False. And I don't know how to put it more clearly. Whomever told you that was wrong.

DISH has 115 channels of HD - without counting the Pay Per View, Regional Sports and Video on Demand offerings. For that to add up to only 4 hours would be crazy (and since 99 of those 115 channels are also on DirecTV, one making that "4 hour" claim would also be insulting other providers).

Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

"ts7" said:


> Could be referring to Dish's compression. However if Dish is providing 4 hrs of full, uncompressed HD each day, I think that puts them ahead of other providers!


Uncompressed?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Hoosier205 said:


> Uncompressed?


another rumor ...

perhaps he is thinking about resolution and GOP numbers ?
1440x1080i and 30+ GOPs for dish


----------



## domingos35 (Jan 12, 2006)

Hoosier205 said:


> Uncompressed?


unlike directv


----------



## garys (Nov 4, 2005)

It does seem to be a strange first post to me though.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> Uncompressed?


No television provider anywhere delivers uncompressed video. LOL. There aren't any that even provide lossless compression; it's all lossy compression of one form or another.

The differences are in resolution, codec, and bitrate.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

"domingos35" said:


> unlike directv


Unlike DirecTV? I hope you realize that there isn't a single provider anywhere in the world distributing uncompressed video. Even Blu-ray is compressed.

Dish Network has plenty of flaws (HD-Lite, fewer HD channels than DirecTV, far too many part-time HD channels, missing RSN's from the nation's #1 DMA, theft, protracted retrans disputes, etc.), but the complaint mentioned by the OP is bogus.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

"BattleZone" said:


> No television provider anywhere delivers uncompressed video. LOL. There aren't any that even provide lossless compression; it's all lossy compression of one form or another.
> 
> The differences are in resolution, codec, and bitrate.


I know. I was only wondering if they meant something else.


----------



## ts7 (Nov 1, 2011)

BattleZone;3161737 said:


> No television provider anywhere delivers uncompressed video. LOL. There aren't any that even provide lossless compression; it's all lossy compression of one form or another.
> 
> The differences are in resolution, codec, and bitrate.


That was my tongue-in-cheek point. If Dish delivered 4 hrs of uncompressed video a day, that would make them the leader. LOL

Perhaps I should have said the OP may have been referring to Dish's "downrezzing" or "HDLite" debate of times past.

Personally I noticed a negligible difference between the HD on Dish vs DirecTV but nothing that was going to effect my viewing. On the other hand I found SD to be superior on Dish.

I think the OP heard some rumours that may have had some factual basis but were distorted and blown way out of proportion. The bottom line is that Dish, DirecTV and the cable companies retransmit HD signals in HD format on the channels they designate as HD though not every channel necessarily carries HD programming 24x7. Every carrier has a different mix of HD channel lineups. Compression formats, downrezzing and other technical issues aside, the majority of the viewing public couldn't tell the difference between HD on one provider or another.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Actually anyone knows when the squeezing video does come to unacceptable level - any untrained eye can recognize macro-blocking and halos. People complaining a lot about the issues, not counting millions of sport fans when edge's jagging become remarkable during watching fast moving players.


----------

