# Directv announces 2019 date for dropping MPEG2 SD



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

According to Solid Signal blog, Directv has announced that 2019 will be when MPEG2 SD broadcasts cease, and all non-HD receivers become doorstops.

http://forums.solidsignal.com/content.php/5483-THE-END-IS-COMING-DIRECTV-announces-end-of-SD-service

Does anyone know the source of this? Was it announced at the Revolution conference earlier this month, some sort of Directv communique to dealers etc. or did Stuart get it from contacts within Directv? Curious if anyone has further details. The discussion about satellites running out of fuel in that blog entry is a bit confusing. The only satellite with fuel life expiring within the next five years is D4S, which if used at all it is just for some SD spot beams. The CONUS transponders from 101 will continue on, and presumably be switched over to carrying HD channels. That would make those HD channels a bit more resistant to rain fade, and allow easier/cheaper reception of them in an RV.

Anyone know anything definite about whether this will be a transition by market or by channel/package or will all MPEG2 SD be kept pretty much as is and shut down all at once?


----------



## mwdxer (Oct 30, 2013)

2019? That is still 3 years away. I wonder where Dish's plans go regarding MPEG4? I guess anything that is still in SD, will still go with MPEG4?


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

My guess is that anyone who still has a SD receiver at that time will get a HD receiver that is capable of sending a SD signal.


----------



## longrider (Apr 21, 2007)

Mark Holtz said:


> My guess is that anyone who still has a SD receiver at that time will get a HD receiver that is capable of sending a SD signal.


All HD receivers are capable of downrezzing and if necessary output a composite video signal. NTSC RF modulation is all you lose.

My understanding is they will shut off SD locals market by market giving the people in that market a push to upgrade. My guess is that all the most popular HD channels will move to 101. While this gives some help in rain fade it will be a big boost to the RV market as all the current in-motion systems will now be good for HD


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN (Oct 13, 2009)

It did not say that they will be getting rid of mpeg-2 SD only. It said that all SD channels will be disappearing including mpeg-4 SD channels


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

They can't get rid of MPEG4 SD, as the ones that are MPEG4 SD are the only version of those channels. They would get rid of dozens of CONUS and hundreds of locals if they dropped MPEG4 SD.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Yeah, I think there was a misunderstanding in a comment on the blog as well. This doesn't mean the end of SD channels, it's the end of MPEG2 SD channels.


----------



## DBSSTEPHEN (Oct 13, 2009)

Why would you think that all the current channels that are mpeg-4 SD have HD feeds DirecTV just don't carry the HD feeds for those channels at this time and more likely will add them around that time in HD


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

DBSSTEPHEN said:


> Why would you think that all the current channels that are mpeg-4 SD have HD feeds DirecTV just don't carry the HD feeds for those channels at this time and more likely will add them around that time in HD


Even in 2019, not everything will be available in HD. There will still be SD only locals, especially independents in major markets like NYC, LA and Philly where they lease out multiple subchannels to other broadcasters (i.e. WMBC/63 in NYC). There will also still be SD only niche channels, SD Only religious/non-profit channels, as well as the numerous international channels with no HD feeds since they originate from countries where their digital transition focused on having more channel choices for free vs having everything possible in HD or are government funded and their budget can change with every election, so getting HD C-Band feeds across the world isn't an option.

Plus there's contractual issues where even if something is available in HD, they can't add it until the contract is up for renewal.


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

I remember, whether it was 2012 or 2013, that DirecTV was going to add everything available in HD, but carried only in SD, in high def by 2016.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

APB101 said:


> I remember, whether it was 2012 or 2013, that DirecTV was going to add everything available in HD, but carried only in SD, in high def by 2016.


The only reference to 2016 was from that infamous out of context quote that was full of holes.


----------



## mkdtv21 (May 27, 2007)

So this means then end of mpeg2 not SD in 2019 correct?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

mkdtv21 said:


> So this means then end of mpeg2 not SD in 2019 correct?


I for one would read into it as the end of mpeg2 and the end of two versions of a channel. It'll either be Hi Definition or if there is no hd it'll be a mpeg4 version in SD. But no more SD duplicates of Hi Definition channels.


----------



## mkdtv21 (May 27, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> I for one would read into it as the end of mpeg2 and the end of two versions of a channel. It'll either be Hi Definition or if there is no hd it'll be a mpeg4 version in SD. But no more SD duplicates of Hi Definition channels.


So I guess if the shut off is 2019 they would have to start the transition process of getting everyone new dishes and hardware quite a bit before that. Maybe next year or the next will start seeing the process begin. I would certainly hope that Directv will upgrade these customers for free since they will be forced into this. I would also hope 2019 will be the year for the end of the hd access fee as it would be pointless if there are no more sd duplicates of hd channels. Here's hoping.


----------



## Visman (Feb 17, 2008)

I guess DirecTV will stop charging the $10.00 fee for HD service once the transition is complete.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Visman said:


> I guess DirecTV will stop charging the $10.00 fee for HD service once the transition is complete.


Technically speaking they already got rid of that, as in there is no HD line item fee anymore for newer customers. But then they also now have to pay for the first receiver while older customers get it credited back.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

I could understand some secondary TVs might still have old SD boxes on them running off of SL5's that don't have SWiM or on legacy ports on a SWiM-8 that need upgrading... but who doesn't have an HD-capable dish? I mean really? What planet are these people living on? I see a few Phase III's here and there among a sea of SL5's and now SL3's, but I'd assume that they are abandoned at this point, and those people have cable, VDSL TV, or nothing.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Lots of people still have non HD capable dishes, Directv still had ~5 million SD only subscribers as of late 2013. Since they stopped taking new SD subscribers in mid 2014 those numbers should have started dropping faster than before, but there would still be several million of them, and almost all of them would have an old dish that would need to be replaced. There are many more HD subscribers who have one or more SD receiver - they are easy to upgrade since Directv can just mail them replacement HD receivers when the time draws closer.

The 2019 date is still three years away, so they have plenty of time to wait for additional natural attrition of SD only subscribers before they begin contacting people about upgrading. By the time they do that there will be a lot fewer so it should be pretty easy for them to manage. They will have tons of old refurbished HD gear so that part won't cost them anything, the only real cost to Directv will be the installer visit and new dish.

I would guess they will offer the old carrot and stick approach - first make them an offer to upgrade to the latest technology in exchange for signing a new two year contract, but if they don't bite on that eventually they'll give them a free no contract upgrade to lesser technology (old H2x/HR2x maybe) that they will have to accept or lose service when MPEG2 goes dark. Probably similar to how they managed the MPG receiver replacement a few years back.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Visman said:


> I guess DirecTV will stop charging the $10.00 fee for HD service once the transition is complete.


Directv isn't going to just lower your bill by $10/month. People paying for HD service are on an older billing scheme that charges differently, not paying for the first receiver and paying $2/month less for DVR / whole home service. If the dropped the HD fee they'd have to change the way they bill the other stuff, get rid of grandfathered packages that are no longer offered, etc. If you are paying it now and remain a customer through the transition, I'm willing to bet you continue paying that HD fee.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> There are many more HD subscribers who have one or more SD receiver - they are easy to upgrade since Directv can just mail them replacement HD receivers when the time draws closer.


If any of those SD receivers are connected to the legacy ports (especially if they have pre-D12 SD receivers) they're going to have to send a truck out to change the wiring to those rooms and possibly upgrade the SWM switch or convert them to a newer LNB if they ran out of SWM slots, otherwise they run the risk of clueless customers unaware of the power inserter and green label splitter requirements accidently frying their system.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Seen a number of old P. Is (that is the 18" round), P. IIIs, and even a (very) few P. IIs upgraded to Slimline-3 and 5s around my area lately. Still though, except for the P. IIs of course, I see a lot of the previous mentioned types on roofs.

Just don't know how many of them are really unused derelicts.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

KyL416 said:


> If any of those SD receivers are connected to the legacy ports (especially if they have pre-D12 SD receivers) they're going to have to send a truck out to change the wiring to those rooms and possibly upgrade the SWM switch or convert them to a newer LNB if they ran out of SWM slots, otherwise they run the risk of clueless customers unaware of the power inserter and green label splitter requirements accidently frying their system.


The legacy ports on a SWM16 are fully operational for HD, so it would only be a situation where a subscriber had a SWM8 that used legacy ports for SD receivers. Since installers were not supposed to be using legacy ports for receivers at all, the number of affected subscribers would be very small. This would be handled as a breakfix, i.e. subscriber gets new receiver(s) shipped, finds some can't access some HD channels, and calls Directv. Directv sends tech, figures out the problem, replaces LNB with 3DR/5DR, removes SWM8 and all is well.


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

HoTat2 said:


> Seen a number of old P. Is (that is the 18" round), P. IIIs, and even a (very) few P. IIs upgraded to Slimline-3 and 5s around my area lately. Still though, except for the P. IIs of course, I see a lot of the previous mentioned types on roofs.
> 
> Just don't know how many of them are really unused derelicts.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Don't forget the p2 is also referred to as a sat c, and featured the sat c upgrade kit to us old timers... God dm it makes me think I've been doing this for way to long that I can identify an 18x24... I need a better hobby.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I was given information that the 2019 date was announced at the recent Revolution conference, and the reason given was "the sunset of three key SD satellites".

So D4S is obviously one of the three. D5 is the next oldest and thus most likely to run out of fuel soon after 2020. While 110 isn't used in the US it is used in PR, so assuming MPEG2 SD is to be phased out there at the same time as in the US that makes sense. The third is uncertain - D8's design life actually expires a bit sooner than D7S's, but there is no way of knowing what the fuel situation for either is beyond 2020 (or any other issues that might reduce their lifetime) unless Directv chooses to tell us.

I think it is safe to say they will replace D8/D9S at 101 when needed, as that's some valuable real estate. When they drop spot beams from 101 they won't need D4S any longer but it won't affect their CONUS broadcast ability (to for example start using for HD) Perhaps they will abandon 110 since it is only three transponders, but I'd be surprised if they abandoned 119 as that would hand a big advantage to a major competitor, but maybe they'd judge that to be less costly than keeping that slot filled? We may not find out exactly what's going to happen until 2019, unless they announce a build contract for a new satellite before then.


----------



## doctor j (Jun 14, 2006)

twizt3dkitty said:


> Don't forget the p2 is also referred to as a sat c, and featured the sat c upgrade kit to us old timers... God dm it makes me think I've been doing this for way to long that I can identify an 18x24... I need a better hobby.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk


I've still got a Sat C Kit in my parts bin " just in case"

Doctor j


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> I was given information that the 2019 date was announced at the recent Revolution conference, and the reason given was "the sunset of three key SD satellites".
> 
> So D4S is obviously one of the three. D5 is the next oldest and thus most likely to run out of fuel soon after 2020. While 110 isn't used in the US it is used in PR, so assuming MPEG2 SD is to be phased out there at the same time as in the US that makes sense. The third is uncertain - D8's design life actually expires a bit sooner than D7S's, but there is no way of knowing what the fuel situation for either is beyond 2020 (or any other issues that might reduce their lifetime) unless Directv chooses to tell us.
> 
> I think it is safe to say they will replace D8/D9S at 101 when needed, as that's some valuable real estate. When they drop spot beams from 101 they won't need D4S any longer but it won't affect their CONUS broadcast ability (to for example start using for HD) Perhaps they will abandon 110 since it is only three transponders, but I'd be surprised if they abandoned 119 as that would hand a big advantage to a major competitor, but maybe they'd judge that to be less costly than keeping that slot filled? We may not find out exactly what's going to happen until 2019, unless they announce a build contract for a new satellite before then.


One must wonder if d15 isn't already destined for 101 and that's why we haven't see much of anything from it yet...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Visman said:


> I guess DirecTV will stop charging the $10.00 fee for HD service once the transition is complete.


That fee doesn't exsist anymore except for grandfathered people. . And really the only people It will affect is people with Hi Definition receivers and NO DVR. Which I am sure is very very few by comparison of their overall customers.

Today it's all one 15 fee for DVR service and you pay for every box no free first box. So it's pretty much a wash.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

inkahauts said:


> That fee doesn't exsist anymore except for grandfathered people. . And really the only people It will affect is people with Hi Definition receivers and NO DVR. Which I am sure is very very few by comparison of their overall customers.
> 
> Today it's all one 15 fee for DVR service and you pay for every box no free first box. So it's pretty much a wash.


Can current customers who have the old pricing get that $15 DVR fee?


----------



## longrider (Apr 21, 2007)

CraigerM said:


> Can current customers who have the old pricing get that $15 DVR fee?


I dont think so but it wont really save you much as you lose the first receiver free deal which is worth $6.50 So if you have Whole Home your fee goes down $8 but your rental goes up $6.50 and if you dont have Whole Home your fee goes down $5 and your rental goes up $6.50


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> One must wonder if d15 isn't already destined for 101 and that's why we haven't see much of anything from it yet...


They wouldn't talk about having the capacity for 50 4K channels, as the reverse band transponders on D14 only allow half that number. They need D15 at 103 for the other half. Its Ka package also makes sense only with it located at 103, not so much for 101.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Pretty sure d15 can supply more space in 101 ku than 103 RDBS correct?


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> Lots of people still have non HD capable dishes, Directv still had ~5 million SD only subscribers as of late 2013. Since they stopped taking new SD subscribers in mid 2014 those numbers should have started dropping faster than before, but there would still be several million of them, and almost all of them would have an old dish that would need to be replaced. There are many more HD subscribers who have one or more SD receiver - they are easy to upgrade since Directv can just mail them replacement HD receivers when the time draws closer.


That's amazing. Who are these people who are paying $70/mo or more an don't even have HD?!? I could see people with old TVs with antenna converter boxes, or cable bundled with an apartment or condo or something, but service that they actually pay for?!?


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

They could also keep the HD fee. Just because there will be no SD mirrors doesn't mean that they can't still sell SD service. Just have a switch they can throw if you don't pay the extra to lock the box output at 480i...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bigg said:


> They could also keep the HD fee. Just because there will be no SD mirrors doesn't mean that they can't still sell SD service. Just have a switch they can throw if you don't pay the extra to lock the box output at 480i...


There is no Hi Definition fee for new customers anymore. And everyone else is grandfathers to whatever they already have...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bigg said:


> That's amazing. Who are these people who are paying $70/mo or more an don't even have HD?!? I could see people with old TVs with antenna converter boxes, or cable bundled with an apartment or condo or something, but service that they actually pay for?!?


There are plenty of older people who have the same tv for 40 years...

Also I'm sure there's a LOT of people who have Hi Definition and hr recovers but have a fourth tv that's SD with an SD receiver somewhere in the house. Don't forget all those boxes...


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

inkahauts said:


> There are plenty of older people who have the same tv for 40 years...
> 
> Also I'm sure there's a LOT of people who have Hi Definition and hr recovers but have a fourth tv that's SD with an SD receiver somewhere in the house. Don't forget all those boxes...


Sure, I'll give you that, but those are easy box swaps to HD without needing a truck roll, and I'm sure they have enough older HD boxes to do that. But people who are paying for TV and don't have HD. What freaking planet to they live on? Even my grandmother has HD-DVR and Triple Play, and she's 82.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

This may be hard for some people here to believe, but there are some people who don't give a crap about HD and won't go HD until their 30+ year old TV finally gives out. Some have a personal preference, some don't watch enough TV to care, others may only watch older series that were never produced in HD, and for many it's purely financial, especially if they're living paycheck to paycheck so spending $150+ to replace what to them is a TV that works just fine is out of the question if the choice is spending that $150 on a new TV or a month's worth of gas money to communte to and from work on a daily basis.

You want to know why my neighbor is SD only? She's a single mother raising two girls after her husband suddenly died about a decade ago, a few years later her company decided to close their local plant so she had to go back to school to get a job in a different field and was out of work that entire time. Her husband's life insurance only pays so much, she cares more about using it to put a meal on her family's table every night vs having a luxury like HD, so she downgraded to Family, the cheapest package she can get so her youngest kid (who barely remembers her dad) can still have something to watch after school and on weekends.

So you want to know what planet they live on? The REAL world where people may have much more important things to deal with instead of replacing their TVs just to get a luxury like HD


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

Who's to say that 101 Ku couldn't still be used (along with the old dish) for Mpeg4 HD, and they just manufacture a cheap new receiver that receives the Mpeg4 HD from 101 Ku while outputting in SD (maybe even still has RF mod in it)??

You'd only have to replace the old receiver. Connect the coax, very little hassle. Does the old 101 Ku dish/lnb setup really "care" what compression scheme is being used?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> Who's to say that 101 Ku couldn't still be used (along with the old dish) for Mpeg4 HD, and they just manufacture a cheap new receiver that receives the Mpeg4 HD from 101 Ku while outputting in SD (maybe even still has RF mod in it)??
> 
> You'd only have to replace the old receiver. Connect the coax, very little hassle. Does the old 101 Ku dish/lnb setup really "care" what compression scheme is being used?


It doesn't "care" at all, and certainly can't tell the difference between DSS/MPEG2/SD and DVB-S2/MPEG4/HD, but if you are suggesting that after moving a bunch of HD channels to 101 Directv can leave the old 101 only dish for those SD only customers and just send them replacement HD receivers there's a big problem - no locals!

I think the 101 only setup will only be useful or supported for RVs, who would pick up the DNS locals from NYC or LA.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> It doesn't "care" at all, and certainly can't tell the difference between DSS/MPEG2/SD and DVB-S2/MPEG4/HD, but if you are suggesting that after moving a bunch of HD channels to 101 Directv can leave the old 101 only dish for those SD only customers and just send them replacement HD receivers there's a big problem - no locals!
> 
> I think the 101 only setup will only be useful or supported for RVs, who would pick up the DNS locals from NYC or LA.


Well, those many already using 101 for locals I wouldn't think necessarily have to change, and if that being the case (even 119 locals also already having their equipment) would still greatly reduce the need for the newer dish as soon. Those absolutely needing Ka for local should already have them.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

For HD DirecTV has about 5-6 channels per-transponder with a 7th MPEG-4/SD channel in some cases, for MPEG-2/SD there's about 12 channels per transponder, there would be no room to put all the HD feeds for locals on the 101 spotbeams, especially since many of the spotbeams are shared with multiple markets. (i.e. NYC, Philly and some Boston channels share the same spotbeam) The same goes for national channels, they'll likely run into contractual and legal issues if they make a setup standard where most of the channels aren't available.

Plus there's the whole mirroring of channels for Puerto Rico that D14 can do, so they're going to want to keep those channels there unless some new satellite at 101 will have Ku-mirroring abilities.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> Well, those many already using 101 for locals I wouldn't think necessarily have to change, and if that being the case (even 119 locals also already having their equipment) would still greatly reduce the need for the newer dish as soon. Those absolutely needing Ka for local should already have them.


The 101 locals are MPEG2 SD, and will be going away. Directv isn't going to continue using the spot beams from 101 to deliver copies of HD locals that are already on 99/103, especially since the D4S satellite that delivers many of those spot beams runs out of fuel in 2019.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

KyL416 said:


> Plus there's the whole mirroring of channels for Puerto Rico that D14 can do, so they're going to want to keep those channels there.


Ah yes, forgot about the mirroring, so I guess they can't _move_ channels until they have a new satellite there able to mirror to PR (and Hawaii, so they don't need the big dish any longer) That wouldn't stop Directv from _duplicating_ the popular channels on 101 for RVs (and rain fade protection) in the US, but that's a less attractive option since it doesn't actually free up any Ka bandwidth.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> I for one would read into it as the end of mpeg2 and the end of two versions of a channel. It'll either be Hi Definition or if there is no hd it'll be a mpeg4 version in SD. But no more SD duplicates of Hi Definition channels.


Of course that's what it means. All the other speculation is silly. Of course they won't drop completely channels that are not available in HD, and it's also equally silly that they'd just convert SD feeds of channels available in HD to SD-MPEG-4. When they get rid of SD duplicates, they'll have a ton more room, so as long as contracts allow it, they'd be incredibly stupid and customer-hostile not to upgrade everything to HD (including PI channels like NASA and CSPAN, and even though I don't watch them even the church and shopping channels)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

They will still need to have the contractual right to carry channels in HD, and it has to make business sense for them for channels that pay for carriage like shopping channels. Hopefully they will have all the contracts worked out, but I'm sure there will still be a few channels that are available in HD that they only carry in SD. Expecting them (or any provider) to hit 100% is just not realistic.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

slice1900 said:


> I was given information that the 2019 date was announced at the recent Revolution conference, and the reason given was "the sunset of three key SD satellites".
> 
> So D4S is obviously one of the three. D5 is the next oldest and thus most likely to run out of fuel soon after 2020. While 110 isn't used in the US it is used in PR, so assuming MPEG2 SD is to be phased out there at the same time as in the US that makes sense. The third is uncertain - D8's design life actually expires a bit sooner than D7S's, but there is no way of knowing what the fuel situation for either is beyond 2020 (or any other issues that might reduce their lifetime) unless Directv chooses to tell us.


Forgot one obvious one, G3C at 95. That has to be one of the three, so I'll bet the list is D4S, D5 and G3C.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bigg said:


> Sure, I'll give you that, but those are easy box swaps to HD without needing a truck roll, and I'm sure they have enough older HD boxes to do that. But people who are paying for TV and don't have HD. What freaking planet to they live on? Even my grandmother has HD-DVR and Triple Play, and she's 82.


I have an aunt that complains her tv is to big. It's a 32" crt. She only does over the air and complains about what's on in general and won't ever consider getting an Hi Definition tv until that tv dies. End of discussion. She is in her 70s. There's a lot people who are stubborn about Hi Definition.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Bigg said:


> Sure, I'll give you that, but those are easy box swaps to HD without needing a truck roll, and I'm sure they have enough older HD boxes to do that. But people who are paying for TV and don't have HD. What freaking planet to they live on? Even my grandmother has HD-DVR and Triple Play, and she's 82.


We have a member in our own ranks that can give you all the downsides of DVD and Blu-Ray and extol the virtues of VHS, from his PC running 98SE.

There really are those that also just don't care, at least until they get it. There are other reasons, like the ones that use an SD dish because they are easier to point for mobile use.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> They will still need to have the contractual right to carry channels in HD, and it has to make business sense for them for channels that pay for carriage like shopping channels. Hopefully they will have all the contracts worked out, but I'm sure there will still be a few channels that are available in HD that they only carry in SD. Expecting them (or any provider) to hit 100% is just not realistic.


AT&T comes extremely close, way closer than DirecTV. The only ones I can think of that are available that they don't carry are the 3 CSPANs and NASA. I can't think of a commercial, non PI/non shopping channel on U-Verse that is available in HD that they carry in SD only on U-Verse


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Just to name a few that are in SD on U-Verse even though they have HD feeds:
Centric
Chiller
Discovery Life
ESPN College Extra
Galavision
IndiePLEX
INSP
Logo
NBC Universo
Showtime Next
Starz Cinema
TeenNick
TVG2


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

KyL416 said:


> This may be hard for some people here to believe, but there are some people who don't give a crap about HD and won't go HD until their 30+ year old TV finally gives out. Some have a personal preference, some don't watch enough TV to care, others may only watch older series that were never produced in HD, and for many it's purely financial, especially if they're living paycheck to paycheck so spending $150+ to replace what to them is a TV that works just fine is out of the question if the choice is spending that $150 on a new TV or a month's worth of gas money to communte to and from work on a daily basis.
> 
> You want to know why my neighbor is SD only? She's a single mother raising two girls after her husband suddenly died about a decade ago, a few years later her company decided to close their local plant so she had to go back to school to get a job in a different field and was out of work that entire time. Her husband's life insurance only pays so much, she cares more about using it to put a meal on her family's table every night vs having a luxury like HD, so she downgraded to Family, the cheapest package she can get so her youngest kid (who barely remembers her dad) can still have something to watch after school and on weekends.
> 
> So you want to know what planet they live on? The REAL world where people may have much more important things to deal with instead of replacing their TVs just to get a luxury like HD


I get that some people can't afford to spend money on TV. But then why on earth do they have DirecTV? The only logical answer I can think of are people in MDUs with an SMATV analog system that uses diplexers, and they don't want to pay the upgrade cost to get a SWiM HD receiver because they don't watch it anyway. If you're going to pay the big bucks for TV, I'd think that you would have a decent TV to watch it on. I could understand somebody with SD and a coupon converter box for OTA if they just don't watch TV more than once in a blue moon.

Considering the monthly cost of TV service, and the commoditization of HDTVs, it makes absolutely no sense to have SD pay TV unless it's included in the rent through a bulk carriage deal.

DirecTV is also a premium provider. There's sports, there's picture quality, there's HD channels, there's international. DirecTV isn't the option you pick because you're on a budget. DirecTV is the option you pick because you WANT a premium service that's arguably the best in the industry (and for most people there's no argument there since most people don't have access to FIOS or Google Fiber), and are wiling to pay through the nose for it. That just doesn't align with the TV from last century crowd.



slice1900 said:


> They will still need to have the contractual right to carry channels in HD, and it has to make business sense for them for channels that pay for carriage like shopping channels. Hopefully they will have all the contracts worked out, but I'm sure there will still be a few channels that are available in HD that they only carry in SD. Expecting them (or any provider) to hit 100% is just not realistic.


Those are separate carriage agreements? That's just weird, it's the same channel. I would think channels would be pushing FOR HD, not trying to get more money for it, considering that a lot of channels that aren't in the HD lineup are just forgotten about. I guess it's different with D* since it's a single lineup, but still, a lot of people will just not watch it if it's blurry SD.



inkahauts said:


> I have an aunt that complains her tv is to big. It's a 32" crt. She only does over the air and complains about what's on in general and won't ever consider getting an Hi Definition tv until that tv dies. End of discussion. She is in her 70s. There's a lot people who are stubborn about Hi Definition.


I get that, since she's not PAYING for TV, and apparently barely ever watches it.



KyL416 said:


> Just to name a few that are in SD on U-Verse even though they have HD feeds:
> Centric
> Chiller
> Discovery Life
> ...


That's weird, considering that while they have severe bandwidth limitations to each house, they effectively have no limit on the number of HD channels that they can carry.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Bigg said:


> I get that some people can't afford to spend money on TV. But then why on earth do they have DirecTV? The only logical answer I can think of are people in MDUs with an SMATV analog system that uses diplexers, and they don't want to pay the upgrade cost to get a SWiM HD receiver because they don't watch it anyway. If you're going to pay the big bucks for TV, I'd think that you would have a decent TV to watch it on. I could understand somebody with SD and a coupon converter box for OTA if they just don't watch TV more than once in a blue moon.


The OTA reception in our area is hit and miss. Our market doesn't have any independents, here OTA you only get the big 4 in HD, and then SD simulcasts of The CW and MyNet on a subchannel. The transmitters for Ion and the HD feed of The CW (which also has a lot of popular subchannels like MeTV) are on the other side of the mountain and impossible to get without a 100 foot tower or destroying an entire forrest in that direction. Our ABC affiliate just has Antenna TV and the new Justice Network, Our Fox affiliate uses their signal to carry SD simulcasts of their sister MyNetworkTV and CW stations because their main channels are on much weaker signals that don't cover the entire market, while our NBC and CBS affiliate flat out refuse to add any subchannels. Plus because of the foolishness of the FCC thinking it's okay to have neighboring markets with channels on the same number, we frequently lose CBS and NBC anytime there's boost going on and WPIX and WNET interfere with them. So while OTA is a nice option in some markets, here DirecTV's Family package is a better alternative if you use TV to keep younger kids entertained or you just want locals since a standalone locals package isn't available.



> DirecTV is also a premium provider. There's sports, there's picture quality, there's HD channels, there's international. DirecTV isn't the option you pick because you're on a budget. DirecTV is the option you pick because you WANT a premium service that's arguably the best in the industry (and for most people there's no argument there since most people don't have access to FIOS or Google Fiber), and are wiling to pay through the nose for it. That just doesn't align with the TV from last century crowd.


DirecTV has 20 million+ subscribers, not everyone subscribes for the same reasons you do. Heck, DirecTV has a hidden package called Preferred Xtra for people who call retention and complain about sports which basically contains everything in Ultimate minus the sports channels, along with budget packages like Select that have the most popular channels, and the Family package which is good for people who don't watch much TV but still want the kids programming, grandparents who only have TV so the grandkids have something to watch when they're visiting, as well as for some people who only care about the religious programming on the P/I channels.

There's also a lot of people who have no choice in the matter because the local OTA situation isn't a viable alternative, and there are no other options.

The local cable company here refuses to wire our neighborhood unless you pay thousands of dollars upfront for every hundred feet they had to run, or they convince everyone who lives from their house to one of the main roads commit to subscribe. My neighbors may be in a financial situation where if it were available, basic cable may be a better deal, but the entire neighborhood isn't in the same situation and they're not going to give up satellite for a cable provider that is missing a lot of channels and don't want to switch to a provider that basically held their service "hostage" from them unless they paid them about 10,000 dollars for the "privlige" of subscribing. It's also not some isolated situation, this happens a LOT, outside of things with mandatory universal deployment like electricity, things like cable are strictly left to the provider where they prewire. And unless that changes, the broadband situation is going to remain crap for a significant portion of the country.



> That's weird, considering that while they have severe bandwidth limitations to each house, they effectively have no limit on the number of HD channels that they can carry.


Outside of a few of them, the main thing those channels have in common is their HD feeds launched after the last time their contract was renewed. Just ask Dish what happens if you try to launch an HD feed without a contract in place to do so...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bigg said:


> I get that some people can't afford to spend money on TV. But then why on earth do they have DirecTV?


If they live somewhere they can't get cable or decent internet, satellite TV is their only choice. Don't put your biases onto other people, not everyone cares that much about image quality, more than a few people would much rather watch something good in snowy SD than crap in crystal clear 4K.



Bigg said:


> Those are separate carriage agreements? That's just weird, it's the same channel. I would think channels would be pushing FOR HD, not trying to get more money for it, considering that a lot of channels that aren't in the HD lineup are just forgotten about. I guess it's different with D* since it's a single lineup, but still, a lot of people will just not watch it if it's blurry SD.


I assumed the same, but people who know how these things work, like Kyl416, assure us that indeed providers not only need permission to carry programming in HD, but generally are expected to pay more for it. If Directv carries something with a small audience, they might never care to provide it in HD if they don't think the channel's asking price is reasonable. Really no different than them refusing to carry a channel at all based on asking price. If you like the channel you might be upset it is SD only, but SD is better than not being carried at all. Of course, if you don't like the channel, you have absolutely no reason to care whether it is carried in SD or HD...


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

KyL416 said:


> The OTA reception in our area is hit and miss. Our market doesn't have any independents, here OTA you only get the big 4 in HD, and then SD simulcasts of The CW and MyNet on a subchannel. The transmitters for Ion and the HD feed of The CW (which also has a lot of popular subchannels like MeTV) are on the other side of the mountain and impossible to get without a 100 foot tower or destroying an entire forrest in that direction. Our ABC affiliate just has Antenna TV and the new Justice Network, Our Fox affiliate uses their signal to carry SD simulcasts of their sister MyNetworkTV and CW stations because their main channels are on much weaker signals that don't cover the entire market, while our NBC and CBS affiliate flat out refuse to add any subchannels. Plus because of the foolishness of the FCC thinking it's okay to have neighboring markets with channels on the same number, we frequently lose CBS and NBC anytime there's boost going on and WPIX and WNET interfere with them. So while OTA is a nice option in some markets, here DirecTV's Family package is a better alternative if you use TV to keep younger kids entertained or you just want locals since a standalone locals package isn't available.
> 
> DirecTV has 20 million+ subscribers, not everyone subscribes for the same reasons you do. Heck, DirecTV has a hidden package called Preferred Xtra for people who call retention and complain about sports which basically contains everything in Ultimate minus the sports channels, along with budget packages like Select that have the most popular channels, and the Family package which is good for people who don't watch much TV but still want the kids programming, grandparents who only have TV so the grandkids have something to watch when they're visiting, as well as for some people who only care about the religious programming on the P/I channels.
> 
> ...


So you get the big 4 in HD. Sounds like decent OTA to me. I wish our channels would get rid of all of their subchannels. They have so many garbage subchannels up that no one watches that their main feeds are an over-compressed mess. If you just want locals, you can get basic cable and it's much cheaper than DBS. DirecTV is a premium product for the most discerning pay TV subscribers.

Unfortunately, that's true that broadband providers often don't wire out to places that they should. We got lucky in CT, as 100% of the state is franchised out, and it was done by town, so they either did all or nothing in each town, so now we're wired. The towns and counties should, in the future, do a better job with the franchise deals, and next time they come up for renewal do an all-or-nothing for a county or whatever the unit is, so that they would be forced into 100% build outs.

But back to the core topic, if people value TV so little that they are watching on an ancient tube TV, then why the heck are they paying top dollar for a premium quality TV service like DirecTV?



slice1900 said:


> If they live somewhere they can't get cable or decent internet, satellite TV is their only choice. Don't put your biases onto other people, not everyone cares that much about image quality, more than a few people would much rather watch something good in snowy SD than crap in crystal clear 4K.
> 
> I assumed the same, but people who know how these things work, like Kyl416, assure us that indeed providers not only need permission to carry programming in HD, but generally are expected to pay more for it. If Directv carries something with a small audience, they might never care to provide it in HD if they don't think the channel's asking price is reasonable. Really no different than them refusing to carry a channel at all based on asking price. If you like the channel you might be upset it is SD only, but SD is better than not being carried at all. Of course, if you don't like the channel, you have absolutely no reason to care whether it is carried in SD or HD...


But if they have some ancient old TV, they clearly don't value their TV enough to be paying the big bucks for a DirecTV subscription. DirecTV is for the sports nuts, for the people who have favourite channels or sports teams that require a lot of HD channels, for the A/V enthusiasts, for the bleeding edge of technology. It's not a bargain product.

Weird. Never woulda thunk'd it. Must be a few small channels playing games with it in their contracts, as it seems most channels would either want HD if they could get the bandwidth, or, in the case of a few of the largest channels, actually spec out the resolution and bandwidth they are getting to make their channels more attractive to the customers.

Yeah, DirecTV seems to be very strategic about what they are carrying in HD, particularly in terms of sports. I have looked at what channels they have in HD, and every channel that I've ever looked up that I would have any interest in watching, particularly for following my favourite team, is in HD. I can't think of any provider other than Frontier/AT&T where this is the case, even though DirecTV's overall 150 HD channel count, while impressive, isn't as high as some of the other providers who have weird holes in their HD lineups.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

Bigg said:


> But back to the core topic, if people value TV so little that they are watching on an ancient tube TV, then why the heck are they paying top dollar for a premium quality TV service like DirecTV?


Obviously, you have not been reading Slice's posts nor have ever lived in a rural area. It might come as a surprise to you that there are many places in the country that do not have cable, DSL, UVerse, Fios, or OTA television. Many of these areas do not have wireless phone service. Especially now that the low band VHS has been entirely vacated by television and there are only a limited number of high band VHS channels still in use (one of the eight stations in our DMA broadcasts on channel 11, but all of the others are on UHF frequencies), OTA reception in what was a fringe area for low band VHS is non-existent with UHF. For many people in sparsely populated areas, Dish and DirecTV are the only options. In areas that have only one cable service, DirecTV is less expensive than cable, and there are many areas with only one cable provider, including my town of 155,227 people in a county that has a population of 1,024,198 in the 24th largest DMA with an estimated 1,150,350 homes that have television. I have only had access to UVerse for less than a year, and I am on the fringe of the areas that can get UVerse - many homes in my town still do not have access to UVerse. We still do not have Fios, either. DirecTV, Dish, UVerse (for some people), and TWC are the only options. In most cases, DirecTV is the least expensive option.

The other thing that may come as a big surprise to you is that many people watch TV for content, and not for the quality of the picture. Some people only watch local and national news on NBC, CBS, or ABC, but they need DirecTV or Dish to be able to get the local channels. Others watch live sporting events on the local channels. To them, being able to watch the program at all is the only thing that matters. In the analog TV days, I put up a big antenna just so I could watch a very poor quality picture from a VHF station 95 miles away, because that was the only way that I could watch the Kentucky basketball games that were on CBS. The local CBS station and the CBS station that was only 60 miles away pre-empted the SEC games to show a local broadcast of an ACC game. Would I liked to have had a better picture? Of course I would, but I was not going to watch the ACC game just because it had a better picture. I was going to watch the Kentucky game regardless of how bad the picture was. That does not mean that I did not value TV, but I valued watching Kentucky basketball over anything to do with picture quality.

I do not understand people who refuse to watch SD because the picture is not good. I chose what I watch based on the program itself - not on whether it is SD, HD, or 4K. I suspect that of the 20+ million DirecTV subscribers, more of them are like me than are like those who refuse to watch anything in SD.

Those of us who are old enough to remember when programs that broadcast in color were a novelty are not going to be upset because not everything is in HD. Those who are complaining about the "slow" conversion to HD and will be complaining about the limited available of 4K do not realize how long it took for color to become the norm. The first network series to be broadcast in color was on NBC in the summer of 1954. ABC's first series broadcast in color was not until 1962, and CBS did not broadcast its first series in color until 1965. The prime time programming for the three major networks was all color starting in1966-1967, but daytime programming was not in color until several years later. Public stations did not start to broadcast in color until 1968. Just because the networks were providing programing in color did not mean that all of the local affiliates were broadcasting in color. The last local channel to switch to color was not until 1986. The number of color television sets sold in the U.S. did not exceed the number of black-and-white sets sold until 1972. It took 18 years from the time that the first network series was broadcast in color until more than half of the new TVs sold were color TVs and 32 years from the time that the first network series was broadcast in color until all local stations were broadcasting in color. Going from black and white to color was a bigger improvement than going from SD to HD was, and going from SD to HD was a bigger improvement than going from HD to 4K will be. The transition from SD to HD has actually been pretty fast.


----------



## MadMac (Feb 18, 2008)

So, what happens if someone still has an old TV with only RF in? Unlikely, but possible.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

MadMac said:


> So, what happens if someone still has an old TV with only RF in? Unlikely, but possible.


RF modulators are available for about $14.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

MadMac said:


> So, what happens if someone still has an old TV with only RF in? Unlikely, but possible.


I don't think that is all that unlikely. I would guess a reasonable percentage of the SD only customers may well be in this situation.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

fleckrj said:


> Obviously, you have not been reading Slice's posts nor have ever lived in a rural area. It might come as a surprise to you that there are many places in the country that do not have cable, DSL, UVerse, Fios, or OTA television. Many of these areas do not have wireless phone service. Especially now that the low band VHS has been entirely vacated by television and there are only a limited number of high band VHS channels still in use (one of the eight stations in our DMA broadcasts on channel 11, but all of the others are on UHF frequencies), OTA reception in what was a fringe area for low band VHS is non-existent with UHF. For many people in sparsely populated areas, Dish and DirecTV are the only options. In areas that have only one cable service, DirecTV is less expensive than cable, and there are many areas with only one cable provider, including my town of 155,227 people in a county that has a population of 1,024,198 in the 24th largest DMA with an estimated 1,150,350 homes that have television. I have only had access to UVerse for less than a year, and I am on the fringe of the areas that can get UVerse - many homes in my town still do not have access to UVerse. We still do not have Fios, either. DirecTV, Dish, UVerse (for some people), and TWC are the only options. In most cases, DirecTV is the least expensive option.
> 
> The other thing that may come as a big surprise to you is that many people watch TV for content, and not for the quality of the picture. Some people only watch local and national news on NBC, CBS, or ABC, but they need DirecTV or Dish to be able to get the local channels. Others watch live sporting events on the local channels. To them, being able to watch the program at all is the only thing that matters. In the analog TV days, I put up a big antenna just so I could watch a very poor quality picture from a VHF station 95 miles away, because that was the only way that I could watch the Kentucky basketball games that were on CBS. The local CBS station and the CBS station that was only 60 miles away pre-empted the SEC games to show a local broadcast of an ACC game. Would I liked to have had a better picture? Of course I would, but I was not going to watch the ACC game just because it had a better picture. I was going to watch the Kentucky game regardless of how bad the picture was. That does not mean that I did not value TV, but I valued watching Kentucky basketball over anything to do with picture quality.
> 
> ...


Basically everywhere has cell phone service, but I digress. If you're going to pay the big bucks for ANY pay-TV, why on earth would you watch it on some crappy little TV screen? And if you have one cable company, bundling is almost always going to be cheaper than DirecTV.

I agree about content, but that logic doesn't work when the content is AVAILABLE in crystal clear HD on Ka-band, which is *almost* everything on DirecTV. With cable, I've watched games in horrible, awful, painful SD because Comcast doesn't have ESPNU in HD on my system, and I'll watch it anyway, but yeah, I certainly would have liked it in HD, and yes, the audio/video experience does play in role in what I watch, even though it's certainly not the only factor. It's one thing if it's not available in HD, it's quite another if you're living in the dark ages and don't even HAVE HD service. People should get with the program.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Not everyone values the latest technology. I guess you were one of those who complained about how much space your local record store devoted to cassette tapes in 1990, because everyone should have upgraded to CDs by then. If you see some someone with a feature phone now you assume they must be poor, because smartphones are so much better so there's no way they'd choose anything less. Obviously you will never understand it, because you place a high value on picture quality - much higher than those who are still SD only who you assume must be fixed income as that's the only reason you can comprehend why someone would still have SD only service.

My dad only replaced his SD TV about three years ago even though his cable company had many HD channels, because it was working and he didn't see the need. Even after he got a 58" plasma and could see everything in HD I had to show him how to choose the HD channels (different numbers on cable) and while he could see the difference he didn't really think it made all that much difference aside from the aspect ratio, and liked how recording in SD took up a lot less space in his DVR (cable DVR with limited recording capacity, I tried to sell him on getting a Tivo like I have but he didn't want to re-learn how to run his DVR) My mom didn't upgrade the bedroom TV she mostly watched until early last year, even though she could see the difference on the plasma she didn't think it was worth upgrading until it gave out. They are retirement age and don't have 20/20 vision but can easily _see_ the difference between HD and SD. They just don't _care_ about the difference all that much. And they still have feature phones, despite being able to afford a new iPhone every day for the rest of their lives.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

fleckrj said:


> RF modulators are available for about $14.


VCRs are free, since most people have one on their closet shelf. They make a fine rf modulator.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

You need something to take composite input and output NTSC on channel 3/4, most VCRs will only take NTSC input and output either composite or NTSC on channel 3/4.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Use to have one of those RF modulators from (the former) Radio Shack myself.

Accepted S-video and composite inputs and included an RF coax input that went to one input of an internal A/B switcher for an antenna or cable/satellite box. The actual output of channel 3/4 modulator went to the other input of the switch.

If there were no video input signals sensed on the S-video or composite inputs the unit would automatically switch the internal A/B switcher to the RF coaxial input and let it pass any signals through to the output.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> You need something to take composite input and output NTSC on channel 3/4, most VCRs will only take NTSC input and output either composite or NTSC on channel 3/4.


What is an NTSC input? NTSC is a broadcast standard, not a type of input.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

studechip said:


> What is an NTSC input? NTSC is a broadcast standard, not a type of input.


I mean a coax input that takes NTSC modulated video, i.e. analog OTA or analog cable.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I did a little digging to see when the license terms are up for Directv's Ku fleet, to see what Directv could have meant by "the sunet of three key SD satellites". The FCC will not grant initial licenses longer than the design life of the satellite, and not always even that long. They will grant extensions only upon assurance that the satellite is in proper working order, that there is sufficient fuel for the satellite to maintain its designated orbit, plus sufficient fuel reserve to boost to a disposal orbit when decommissioned.

First, the three I think that Directv was referring to: D4S (101 SD spot beams) has been extended, and its license runs through Sept. 27, 2020. D5 (110 SD channels in Puerto Rico only) has been extended, and its license runs through Feb. 28, 2022. G3C (international channels at 95, owned and operated by Intelsat) is still on its original 15 year license, which expires Sept. 22, 2017. Presumably it is possible for Intelsat to ask for an extension, but even if they do this might be Directv's first priority in the MPEG2 transition. After all, they are paying to lease those transponders and there be significant savings from this, depending on the lease expiration and what under what terms a lease extension would be granted.

Next the two satellites that provide CONUS from 101: D8 (101 CONUS SD channels) has been extended once, its license runs through June 23, 2025. D9S (101 CONUS SD channels and SD spot beams) is still on its original license, which was 10 years for its Ku payload, until Dec. 7, 2016, and 15 years for its Ka payload, until Dec. 17, 2021. Not sure why the difference there, but they will presumably apply for another 10 year term for Ku later this year, extending until 2026. Directv is likely covered from 101 for another decade.

Finally, D7S: (119 CONUS SD channels and SD spot beams) has been extended once, its license runs through Apr. 4, 2021. What they might do with 119 after MPEG2 SD is shut down is unclear, but if they want to continue to occupy it they'd have a few choices:

1) build a new satellite - if they do this they probably have to announce a contract within the next year or so, given the typical timeline from the commencement of the build contract to launch and operations.
2) move an existing satellite to take over 119 - the only candidates would be D8 & D9S, and they'd need both since one is RCHP only and one is LCHP only. Obviously to do this they'd need a new satellite for 101, so again that would have to be announced within the next year or so.
3) buy a 'used' Ku satellite already in orbit from someone else and move it to 119.
4) lease transponders from Dish, since they already have satellites capable of CONUS broadcast for these transponders at 119.

The other alternative is to simply abandon 119, which would effectively give Dish use (but not ownership) of them. They probably don't want to hand an advantage to a competitor, but if they judge the cost/benefit of continuing to use 119 doesn't add up, they might take this course if they don't have anything useful to do with it. The only thing I can think of is west coast feeds of less viewed national channels Directv doesn't currently provide HD west coast feeds of. They probably wouldn't want to use it for something that makes anyone _require_ a 5 LNB because it complicates installs.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

I don't think I've ever seen a VCR that didn't have a composite input on it.

Stand-alone modulators can be found at the local big-box building center for around $6.00 and they work pretty slick. I've got one on a HR21 connected to an old, low-def portable TV. It comes on automatically when it receives a video signal. It also has an RF pass-through in case there's cable/OTA connection needed.

I'm not sure what the term "feature phone" means, but I'm still using a flip phone (circa 2009). Never saw the need for a smart phone, but probably get one when it quits working. I like I can pop the card right out of the side of it and quickly load stuff into it (yes, it plays video). Takes adequate pics, too.

Some of us "oldsters" don't necessarily mind keeping one foot in the technological "stone age" for some things.

At any rate, I've no problem with the discontinued use of MPEG2 when the day comes. I'm sure there will be plans and offers in place to deal with the customers still using it by then. Not to worry.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

On another note... I now expect 95 to be sunseted in 2019 as well.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

At some point, many people get tired of chasing the latest tech. (If they ever were interested in the first place...)

When I met my wife, she was amazed that a high tech guy like me actually used a wind up alarm clock. (It never had a power failure before batteries were common in clocks.)

I had a microwave oven when I was 10--when the thought was to replace the regular oven. I didn't like the results so I didn't get my own until countertop microwaves were inexpensive. 

When Sunday Ticket started, DIRECTV didn't get it immediately. So I went Big Ugly Dish instead. (And was a source of wildfeed video tapes for all the Star Trek and other SciFi our local station kept moving around without announcements...)

I'm tired of the latest smartphone having fewer features than my HTC Windows 5.1 phones. (And less stability.) I have switched back to a basic clamshell phone a time or two. Stock options trading and traveling without a smart phone is too painful, otherwise I'd switch permanently. (Might try the tablet route someday, though I resist carrying two devices again.)

Everyone's situation, values, goals are different. And frequently changing. There are people who don't even have TV. Amazingly, some people who make a living on TV don't have them. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> ...
> Some of us "oldsters" don't necessarily mind keeping one foot in the technological "stone age" for some things.


Absolutely.  And for many, differing reasons. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> I don't think I've ever seen a VCR that didn't have a composite input on it.


Just checked the VCR I have sitting in the basement and it doesn't have a composite input, but for all I know the older one it replaced did. I suppose that could be useful for recording off a camcorder onto VHS. Guess that was a feature I never really looked for since I had no need of it.

At any rate dedicated modulators are cheap and much smaller / simpler. I wouldn't be surprised if Directv supplies modulators to customers who they force to upgrade to HD receivers, if they are using the channel 3/4 output on a SD receiver to a very old TV. Seems like a cheap investment to help keep a customer who would have obviously been around for a very long time if this is happening in 2019.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

inkahauts said:


> On another note... I now expect 95 to be sunseted in 2019 as well.


I've always been curious about what's available on that location. What type of dish does it use? Are there any worthwhile channels on there? (Not even sure if I've got line-of-sight to that location, but I think SWiM has input for it.) I would suppose it depends on subscription package, as well...



slice1900 said:


> Just checked the VCR I have sitting in the basement and it doesn't have a composite input, but for all I know the older one it replaced did. I suppose that could be useful for recording off a camcorder onto VHS. Guess that was a feature I never really looked for since I had no need of it.
> 
> At any rate dedicated modulators are cheap and much smaller / simpler. I wouldn't be surprised if Directv supplies modulators to customers who they force to upgrade to HD receivers, if they are using the channel 3/4 output on a SD receiver to a very old TV. Seems like a cheap investment to help keep a customer who would have obviously been around for a very long time if this is happening in 2019.


Now that I'm thinking about it, I think I can remember VHS player-only machines which of course wouldn't need that input, either. I don't think RF mods were ever available built-into DVD players. Not even the recorders. The recorders just have pass-through and a tuner for capture of NTSC OTA. No mod.

On the flip side of that, the first VCR I ever had that _didn't _have an RF mod in it was a DVHS used for HD. And like the DVD recorders just an NTSC (unfortunately no ATSC) capture/pass through.

We were actually using an old VCR for a while (which had to be commandeered weekly to tape a radio broadcast) until I inadvertently ran across that inexpensive replacement. Talk about a hassle saver.

Back to topic, though, I really hope they find good HD use for that 101 location. Can't imagine it being totally abandoned. I definitely agree it would make a great easy setup for mobile/vacation/tailgate, etc. if they put the most common/desireable HD and DNS there.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> Not everyone values the latest technology. I guess you were one of those who complained about how much space your local record store devoted to cassette tapes in 1990, because everyone should have upgraded to CDs by then. If you see some someone with a feature phone now you assume they must be poor, because smartphones are so much better so there's no way they'd choose anything less. Obviously you will never understand it, because you place a high value on picture quality - much higher than those who are still SD only who you assume must be fixed income as that's the only reason you can comprehend why someone would still have SD only service.
> 
> My dad only replaced his SD TV about three years ago even though his cable company had many HD channels, because it was working and he didn't see the need. Even after he got a 58" plasma and could see everything in HD I had to show him how to choose the HD channels (different numbers on cable) and while he could see the difference he didn't really think it made all that much difference aside from the aspect ratio, and liked how recording in SD took up a lot less space in his DVR (cable DVR with limited recording capacity, I tried to sell him on getting a Tivo like I have but he didn't want to re-learn how to run his DVR) My mom didn't upgrade the bedroom TV she mostly watched until early last year, even though she could see the difference on the plasma she didn't think it was worth upgrading until it gave out. They are retirement age and don't have 20/20 vision but can easily _see_ the difference between HD and SD. They just don't _care_ about the difference all that much. And they still have feature phones, despite being able to afford a new iPhone every day for the rest of their lives.


There is absolutely no rational reason why someone would be PAYING for SD service. NONE. If they can't afford an HD setup, then they clearly can't afford TV. I get HOA bundled/SMATV types of setups, or OTA with a converter box setups, or basic cable if you can't get OTA. But not the premium pricing of a standalone DirecTV subscription to get PayTV channels.

It's amazing how oblivious people are to things. I can look at the screen and pretty much tell if it's 480i, 720p, 1080i/p or 2160p. And yes, I care.

The same logic applies to Smartphones. Considering Tracfone has the $100/year smartphone, no one has an excuse anymore not to be living in the modern world.

Pretty much any VCR can act as an RF modulator. However, TVs made in the 1990's have composite video inputs, so we're talking about some old, old stuff here. Someone somewhere probably has some 30+ year old TV, but that's got to be rare, even amongst people who still for some crazy reason have SD TVs.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bigg said:


> There is absolutely no rational reason why someone would be PAYING for SD service. NONE. If they can't afford an HD setup, then they clearly can't afford TV. I get HOA bundled/SMATV types of setups, or OTA with a converter box setups, or basic cable if you can't get OTA. But not the premium pricing of a standalone DirecTV subscription to get PayTV channels.


So TV is worthless if it isn't in HD? Wow, what color is the sky in this little world you live in, sitting in judgement of everyone who has different opinions than you do about what TV is worth paying for and what isn't? How many 4K channels need to come before you say the same thing about paying for HD service?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bigg said:


> There is absolutely no rational reason why someone would be PAYING for SD service. NONE. If they can't afford an HD setup, then they clearly can't afford TV. I get HOA bundled/SMATV types of setups, or OTA with a converter box setups, or basic cable if you can't get OTA. But not the premium pricing of a standalone DirecTV subscription to get PayTV channels.
> 
> It's amazing how oblivious people are to things. I can look at the screen and pretty much tell if it's 480i, 720p, 1080i/p or 2160p. And yes, I care.
> 
> ...


I'll give you one simple example why you are completely wrong. My grandmother. She's 97. She has macular degeneration so she's basically blind. But she still likes listening to the news and a few other things. What the heck would she pay more for Hi Definition for? That would be totally senseless since she can't see the tv at all!

And there's plenty of people who just don't care like you do. I care a ton and don't even really watch SD at all. But I don't assume everyone who can't have an Hi Definition tv and doesn't want to pay for Hi Definition shouldn't have Hi Definition. Heck I'm sure there's plenty of people out there with HDTV still hooked up composite and thinking they are getting Hi Definition it happens!


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Bigg said:


> There is absolutely no rational reason why someone would be PAYING for SD service. NONE. If they can't afford an HD setup, then they clearly can't afford TV. I get HOA bundled/SMATV types of setups, or OTA with a converter box setups, or basic cable if you can't get OTA. But not the premium pricing of a standalone DirecTV subscription to get PayTV channels.
> 
> It's amazing how oblivious people are to things. I can look at the screen and pretty much tell if it's 480i, 720p, 1080i/p or 2160p. And yes, I care.
> 
> ...


There is one very important rational reason - they do not want to upgrade, they are happy with SD. That is very rational.

Ditto smart phones. Or computers/tablets/phablets/whatever. There is absolutely NO reason anyone should run around chasing "newer/bigger/better/..." technology if they don't WANT to.

Earlier you said "everywhere has cell phone service", but that isn't true either. Geographically, about 1/3 of my State has no cellular service. None. I'll admit those are not heavily populated areas, but there are people who live there (and it is very common to see 18" round dishes on homes in those areas).

No, embracing the "latest, greatest" technology really isn't something everyone wants to, or needs to, do.

Yeah, I'm older, but I do have HD, smartphones, many computers, probably more involved in "tech" than most folks my age. But I really understand the other side, and why some don't want it. I have a couple of neighbors who don't even have an email account, let alone a computer.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> And there's plenty of people who just don't care like you do. I care a ton and don't even really watch SD at all. But I don't assume everyone who can't have an Hi Definition tv and doesn't want to pay for Hi Definition shouldn't have Hi Definition. Heck I'm sure there's plenty of people out there with HDTV still hooked up composite and thinking they are getting Hi Definition it happens!


I prefer HD, but I won't not watch something I want to watch because it is SD, or nor will I watch something preferentially because it is HD. For example, I have probably 50-60 movies recorded on my Tivo that I haven't watched. Almost every one of them is SD. About half were recorded off one of my local subchannels, the rest off TCM, Sundance and FXM which my cable company don't distribute in HD. I enjoy a good movie just as much if it is in SD, and hate a bad movie in HD or even if I could watch it in 64K 3D with a color gamut as wide as real life.

The reason I have so many SD movies saved but few HD ones is because I generally watch the HD ones I have recorded first - not because I prefer them, but because they take up so much space. If I had even half that number of movies saved in HD I'd need to upgrade the hard drive in my Tivo. Making a point of watching the HD ones first avoids the need to bother with that (and would probably just encourage me to record even more movies when I will probably never get around to watching the ones I have already recorded as it is)

If I had to choose between dropping just ONE channel I watch a lot, like ESPN, and dropping HD I'd drop HD in a heartbeat. I spent almost all of my life watching in SD, it would not be that much of a burden to go back. I actually don't pay anything to my cable company for HD, the only way they have ever charged for HD is by charging more for their HD receivers/DVRs, which I don't use.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Bigg said:


> There is absolutely no rational reason why someone would be PAYING for SD service. NONE. If they can't afford an HD setup, then they clearly can't afford TV. I get HOA bundled/SMATV types of setups, or OTA with a converter box setups, or basic cable if you can't get OTA. But not the premium pricing of a standalone DirecTV subscription to get PayTV channels.
> 
> It's amazing how oblivious people are to things. I can look at the screen and pretty much tell if it's 480i, 720p, 1080i/p or 2160p. And yes, I care.
> 
> ...


Clearly this all is important to you at this point in your life. At some other time in your life, you probably didn't care so much--you were probably more into eating, sleeping, and crawling until you could walk. 

At some future point in your life, you might not care about the iPhone 37, Android 30 (ButterBall), or 16K TV. You might be satisfied with your iPhone 35, Android 27 (Fuzzy Navel), or 8k TV. You might have reached the point where eye surgery/glasses can't fix your eyes anymore. You no longer can see what you can see today.

Or (may this never happen), you find yourself in a financial situation whereby any TV is better than no TV. The kids still want nickelodian, yet you can't afford the 8k version. And you're only TV is a hand me down from your sister, a 15 year old HD TV.

These are real people too. They make their choices differently than you at this point. Why bash them?

(And there are places without cell phones, over the air TV, or cable. In fact, in the mountainous areas it can happen a few miles outside of a city.)

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

carl6 said:


> There is one very important rational reason - they do not want to upgrade, they are happy with SD. That is very rational.
> 
> Ditto smart phones. Or computers/tablets/phablets/whatever. There is absolutely NO reason anyone should run around chasing "newer/bigger/better/..." technology if they don't WANT to.
> 
> ...


I bet you still see some big ugly dishes out there too. I still see them as I travel across the US. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Tom Robertson said:


> I bet you still see some big ugly dishes out there too. I still see them as I travel across the US.


But how many are actively being used? There was one visible from the street as you drive by a few blocks from my house. It was dirty and may not have been used for a long time. I noticed recently that it was gone, probably the owner of the house decided it was an eyesore, or some hobbyist came along and offered to cart it away for free.

You can still see a fair number of 72.5* dishes on roofs around town and obviously zero of them are still in active use.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> Just checked the VCR I have sitting in the basement and it doesn't have a composite input, but for all I know the older one it replaced did. I suppose that could be useful for recording off a camcorder onto VHS. Guess that was a feature I never really looked for since I had no need of it.
> 
> At any rate dedicated modulators are cheap and much smaller / simpler. I wouldn't be surprised if Directv supplies modulators to customers who they force to upgrade to HD receivers, if they are using the channel 3/4 output on a SD receiver to a very old TV. Seems like a cheap investment to help keep a customer who would have obviously been around for a very long time if this is happening in 2019.


It doesn't have rca (composite) inputs on it in addition to the coaxial?


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> I bet you still see some big ugly dishes out there too. I still see them as I travel across the US.
> 
> Peace,
> Tom


I'm not sure how many BUDs are still in actual use. You see fewer and fewer these days, mostly remnants that are not worth the time or effort to remove. And yes, out in the boonies is where it is not uncommon to see one here or there.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> I prefer HD, but I won't not watch something I want to watch because it is SD, or nor will I watch something preferentially because it is HD. For example, I have probably 50-60 movies recorded on my Tivo that I haven't watched. Almost every one of them is SD. About half were recorded off one of my local subchannels, the rest off TCM, Sundance and FXM which my cable company don't distribute in HD. I enjoy a good movie just as much if it is in SD, and hate a bad movie in HD or even if I could watch it in 64K 3D with a color gamut as wide as real life.
> 
> The reason I have so many SD movies saved but few HD ones is because I generally watch the HD ones I have recorded first - not because I prefer them, but because they take up so much space. If I had even half that number of movies saved in HD I'd need to upgrade the hard drive in my Tivo. Making a point of watching the HD ones first avoids the need to bother with that (and would probably just encourage me to record even more movies when I will probably never get around to watching the ones I have already recorded as it is)
> 
> If I had to choose between dropping just ONE channel I watch a lot, like ESPN, and dropping HD I'd drop HD in a heartbeat. I spent almost all of my life watching in SD, it would not be that much of a burden to go back. I actually don't pay anything to my cable company for HD, the only way they have ever charged for HD is by charging more for their HD receivers/DVRs, which I don't use.


With me it boils down to there's so much more on tv than I can watch anyway I generally won't even bother giving an SD program a chance in the first place.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> So TV is worthless if it isn't in HD? Wow, what color is the sky in this little world you live in, sitting in judgement of everyone who has different opinions than you do about what TV is worth paying for and what isn't? How many 4K channels need to come before you say the same thing about paying for HD service?


Close. I'll watch sports for my favorite team if it's SD, although it's only SD because I don't have D*. When I get D*, I will get 100% of games in HD.



inkahauts said:


> I'll give you one simple example why you are completely wrong. My grandmother. She's 97. She has macular degeneration so she's basically blind. But she still likes listening to the news and a few other things. What the heck would she pay more for Hi Definition for? That would be totally senseless since she can't see the tv at all!


Correct aspect ratio, clearer picture to start out with.



carl6 said:


> There is one very important rational reason - they do not want to upgrade, they are happy with SD. That is very rational.
> 
> Ditto smart phones. Or computers/tablets/phablets/whatever. There is absolutely NO reason anyone should run around chasing "newer/bigger/better/..." technology if they don't WANT to.
> 
> ...


Smartphones are actually a far more important thing than HDTV in terms of modern society. Society expects everyone to have a smartphone, and you miss out on modern products and services if you don't have one. HDTV is one of those things that a lot of people don't need, but anyone who doesn't need HDTV clearly doesn't need pay tv in the first place. The people who want pay tv should be going with HD.

What state is that? I know WV has the NRQZ, and thus has a big hole, although even a few years back, I saw plenty of SL5 dishes in that area, including a few places that didn't have indoor plumbing, but did have SL5s. So I guess HDTV > indoor plumbing.... And even if somewhere doesn't have any cell service at all, which are very, very few places at this point when you look at AT&T and Verizon, they can get something like Excede satellite internet, so dial-up is not a reasonable way to get online. Yes, satellite internet sucks, but at least you can do basic internet stuff on it, which you can't on dial-up.



slice1900 said:


> I prefer HD, but I won't not watch something I want to watch because it is SD, or nor will I watch something preferentially because it is HD. For example, I have probably 50-60 movies recorded on my Tivo that I haven't watched. Almost every one of them is SD. About half were recorded off one of my local subchannels, the rest off TCM, Sundance and FXM which my cable company don't distribute in HD. I enjoy a good movie just as much if it is in SD, and hate a bad movie in HD or even if I could watch it in 64K 3D with a color gamut as wide as real life.
> 
> The reason I have so many SD movies saved but few HD ones is because I generally watch the HD ones I have recorded first - not because I prefer them, but because they take up so much space. If I had even half that number of movies saved in HD I'd need to upgrade the hard drive in my Tivo. Making a point of watching the HD ones first avoids the need to bother with that (and would probably just encourage me to record even more movies when I will probably never get around to watching the ones I have already recorded as it is)
> 
> If I had to choose between dropping just ONE channel I watch a lot, like ESPN, and dropping HD I'd drop HD in a heartbeat. I spent almost all of my life watching in SD, it would not be that much of a burden to go back. I actually don't pay anything to my cable company for HD, the only way they have ever charged for HD is by charging more for their HD receivers/DVRs, which I don't use.


Bleh. I'll watch sports in SD to follow my team, but that's it. And that is one of the reasons I want to get D* when I own my own house. Back then, things weren't produced for HD. Today, everything is produced for HD, so you're missing out if you don't have it.



inkahauts said:


> With me it boils down to there's so much more on tv than I can watch anyway I generally won't even bother giving an SD program a chance in the first place.


Yeah, I will only do it for my favorite basketball team, and that's only because ESPNU isn't HD on some Comcast systems, even though on providers where it is available in HD, it's absolutely stunning.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

There are people in society who are different than you. People who do not see the need for HD or DVRs or Smartphones or any cellular device. There is something to be said about not adopting every bleeding edge technology that is introduced. That something should not be derogatory.

People make different choices. Lets try not to turn the differences into insults.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

James Long said:


> There are people in society who are different than you. People who do not see the need for HD or DVRs or Smartphones or any cellular device. There is something to be said about not adopting every bleeding edge technology that is introduced. That something should not be derogatory.
> 
> People make different choices. Lets try not to turn the differences into insults.


That's fine. If they don't value TV, there are plenty of other things to do. I know lots of people who don't watch TV, and don't have much interest in it other than occasionally at somebody else's place. But PAYING for TV without HD-DVR service is completely insane. Either do it or don't- don't half-ass it.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bigg said:


> Close. I'll watch sports for my favorite team if it's SD, although it's only SD because I don't have D*. When I get D*, I will get 100% of games in HD.
> 
> Correct aspect ratio, clearer picture to start out with.


Did you even read my post? She can't see the picture! Clearer doesn't exsist for her. And aspect ratio doesn't matter either. She listened to her tv not watches.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bigg said:


> That's fine. If they don't value TV, there are plenty of other things to do. I know lots of people who don't watch TV, and don't have much interest in it other than occasionally at somebody else's place. But PAYING for TV without HD-DVR service is completely insane. Either do it or don't- don't half-ass it.


You are saying people must value quality as much as content without question when making a purchase. That's just not logical or practicals to state. Especially when you say you watch your sports teams in SD if they aren't in Hi Definition. Therefore you do think content is important. Some people ONLY care about content and not at all about quality as long as they can see it.

You could take your argument even further and say that people should only watch movies in a theater and never watch them at home.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Bigg said:


> That's fine. If they don't value TV, there are plenty of other things to do. I know lots of people who don't watch TV, and don't have much interest in it other than occasionally at somebody else's place. But PAYING for TV without HD-DVR service is completely insane. Either do it or don't- don't half-ass it.


Kudos for trying to understand the situations of others. As we gain insights into one another's point of view, we all benefit.

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> You could take your argument even further and say that people should only watch movies in a theater and never watch them at home.


That would give a better audience participation effect... 

Though some families and home theatres are sufficient to get whole experience--if they have a good popcorn source. 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Bigg said:


> But PAYING for TV without HD-DVR service is completely insane.


No ... it is just a choice. Perhaps not a choice you would make or support but it is a choice.

As a moderator I must say that we are done with insults. You have made your point and expressed your feelings about people who choose not to subscribe to HD-DVR service. We need to get back to talking about DIRECTV instead of people.


----------



## chances14 (Nov 8, 2014)

count me as one who cares a lot more about the content than the quality. Sure HD is nice, but I am perfectly content with watching something in SD


----------



## wxman (Jun 7, 2010)

I do not have a DVR. Why? I'm already paying about $100 for tv with no premiums. I do not want the added expense of a DVR. I use a stand alone recorder to record some shows (dvd recorder with a hard drive).


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

inkahauts said:


> You are saying people must value quality as much as content without question when making a purchase. That's just not logical or practicals to state. Especially when you say you watch your sports teams in SD if they aren't in Hi Definition. Therefore you do think content is important. Some people ONLY care about content and not at all about quality as long as they can see it.
> 
> You could take your argument even further and say that people should only watch movies in a theater and never watch them at home.


Right, because there is no reasonable way for me to get them in HD. If I owned the place I lived in, then there would be a dish on the roof to get them in HD. I'd also argue that the experience of my 65" 4k TV with 7.1 channel surround sound with DTS-HD audio, while a very modest setup by the standards of a Home Theater setup, still provides an experience equal to or better than most of the crappy multiplexes.

DirecTV's entire value proposition is based on the facts that while they are far more expensive than cable, they have a really good HD-DVR whole-home system, the most HD (in most places), the best picture quality (in most places), the most HD sports, even more HD sports after that, a few more HD sports channels just for good measure, and now offer more 4k than anyone else, since no one else offers it.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Directv is not "far more expensive than cable", at least not where I live. You must have better competition from having not only cable but also a telco alternative like FIOS. You're lucky, in places with no competition for TV - especially where I live which has a lot of large trees in many areas of the city - cable prices are much higher. I pay nearly $90/month for an expanded basic / family package with about 70 HD channels and maybe ten or so SD channels, not counting subchannels, public access, or religious channels. And that's with me paying only $1.99 for a cable card, and no other equipment fees!

The closest equivalent Directv package would probably be Entertainment, and while maybe it would end up costing more after the intro period it sure wouldn't be "far more expensive".


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

What about VOD replacing the DVR and you could have just HD receivers or just the TV's and no box? However what do you do about pausing and rewinding live TV?


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> Directv is not "far more expensive than cable", at least not where I live. You must have better competition from having not only cable but also a telco alternative like FIOS. You're lucky, in places with no competition for TV - especially where I live which has a lot of large trees in many areas of the city - cable prices are much higher. I pay nearly $90/month for an expanded basic / family package with about 70 HD channels and maybe ten or so SD channels, not counting subchannels, public access, or religious channels. And that's with me paying only $1.99 for a cable card, and no other equipment fees!
> 
> The closest equivalent Directv package would probably be Entertainment, and while maybe it would end up costing more after the intro period it sure wouldn't be "far more expensive".


So the base TV package itself isn't that much cheaper on cable, if any. However, that's not the whole story, and the whole story explains why DirecTV has to be a premium service. With DirecTV, you have to pay $6/mo for every single TV. With cable, you can get TiVo and only have one box on their network, with TiVo Minis for the rest, or you can have DTAs for $2/mo, or on some older systems they still have some clear QAM or analog, although none of those offer DVR capabilities, so they're not that practical. But TiVo does remain very practical.

The bigger issue, however, is that for much of the country, cable is their only option for broadband, so the cable company has got them. If they bundle internet and TV, not only do they not pay the de-bundling surcharge, but they also get the bundling discount. This does vary depending on your location. FIOS has, over the past couple of years, made reasonable internet-only packages available, as do some smaller cable companies that aren't making much on TV anymore due to high carriage fees. However, even on FIOS, their bundles are pretty cheap. And of course if you can get U-Verse on AT&T, then you can bundle with D*. However, here in CT, Frontier also bundles, although not nearly as aggressively as cable does, and decent speeds are only available to a small fraction of houses that are close enough to their local VRAD. So it's not competition, but rather the lack of competition that makes cable much cheaper than DirecTV in many cases. My town has a local overbuilder, but most do not, so they're stuck with Comcast, Cox, or Charter, all of which make internet-only rather pricey compared to bundling.

Not looking at the equipment issue, which is worth a few bucks more, and is more valuable the more TVs you have, and not including the packaged needed for 4k, since cable doesn't even have that, you still have to look at the "Advanced Receiver Service", whatever the heck that is (apparently a made up fee for Genie), and excluding various other made up fees like RSNs and locals, since they're probably similar on both sides, and not looking at teaser rates, Comcast is $158/mo in my area for a bundle, versus $83/mo for Comcast internet plus $108/mo for DirecTV equals $191/mo for both. And that doesn't include HBO on either or extra box fees on DirecTV/ the amortized cost of TiVo on cable. So that's $33/mo different after all the teasers run out, and assuming the equipment fees on DirecTV are about the same as the amortized cost of TiVo, which probably isn't the case, so realistically you're at $40/mo or more, and it grows the more TVs you have. In my exact case, I could get internet from the local overbuilder for a relatively cheap $59/mo, but I'm looking at the incumbent, since that's what most people in the state and the country are looking at. That's what my parents are looking at, since they are at 11kft from Frontier's CO, so Comcast has an ironclad monopoly on their internet until Frontier decides that they want to put a VRAD at their crossbox, and even then, they'd be looking at probably 24 or maybe 45mbps pair bonded as opposed to 150mbps on Comcast that's actually 175mbps.

Oh, so then there's the HD channel pack that includes some channels that were inexplicably (other than not having an SD version?) plucked from the regular lineup, some of which are available on cable in a normal package, and put into a $5/mo package. Then there's the DirecTV protection plan, which doesn't have an equivalent on cable, since they maintain to the demarc for no extra charge, the equipment is all customer owned except for the CableCard in the TiVo, and the wiring is entirely generic and fixable by the end user, for another $8/mo. Whoops, we're over $50/mo more than cable now. Even taking the $33/mo number and assuming equipment is the same, that's $46/mo more for DirecTV.

So DirecTV's entire value proposition is based on better HD picture quality, more HD channels, more HD sports, and everything else that cable doesn't have. They can't compete on price as long as cable has a monopoly on internet and is offering the insanely cheap bundles. So they have to be a better service that is for people who either want sports and more sports (in crystal clear HD of course, probably on multiple TVs if they're fantasy sports nuts), or the tech-savvy user who wants the best service possible. They can't compete on price.



CraigerM said:


> What about VOD replacing the DVR and you could have just HD receivers or just the TV's and no box? However what do you do about pausing and rewinding live TV?


That wouldn't work on DirecTV, but even on cable, VOD is so limited and locked down, and a lot of stuff isn't there. VOD isn't to the point of replacing the DVR. No way.


----------



## chances14 (Nov 8, 2014)

cable is certainly cheaper where I live.. because there is no cable in this area.

it's directv, dish, or nothing


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Bigg said:


> So the base TV package itself isn't that much cheaper on cable, if any. However, that's not the whole story, and the whole story explains why DirecTV has to be a premium service. With DirecTV, you have to pay $6/mo for every single TV. With cable, you can get TiVo and only have one box on their network, with TiVo Minis for the rest, or you can have DTAs for $2/mo, or on some older systems they still have some clear QAM or analog, although none of those offer DVR capabilities, so they're not that practical. But TiVo does remain very practical.
> 
> The bigger issue, however, is that for much of the country, cable is their only option for broadband, so the cable company has got them. If they bundle internet and TV, not only do they not pay the de-bundling surcharge, but they also get the bundling discount. This does vary depending on your location. FIOS has, over the past couple of years, made reasonable internet-only packages available, as do some smaller cable companies that aren't making much on TV anymore due to high carriage fees. However, even on FIOS, their bundles are pretty cheap. And of course if you can get U-Verse on AT&T, then you can bundle with D*. However, here in CT, Frontier also bundles, although not nearly as aggressively as cable does, and decent speeds are only available to a small fraction of houses that are close enough to their local VRAD. So it's not competition, but rather the lack of competition that makes cable much cheaper than DirecTV in many cases. My town has a local overbuilder, but most do not, so they're stuck with Comcast, Cox, or Charter, all of which make internet-only rather pricey compared to bundling.
> 
> ...


They seem to have a lot of the network shows on VOD the day after it airs so you wouldn't need to record them.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

Just to add to the cable vs. DirecTV comparison, I don't know what Frontier is for bundled service versus just internet, but while Comcast, excluding equipment and other fees is $158 versus $191 for DirecTV, with the overbuilder, cable is $110 versus $70 plus $108 for DirecTV is $178, all before the HD extras and equipment plan makes DirecTV even more expensive. But DirecTV has 150 crystal clear HDs, Comcast has 70 lousy HDs, and the overbuilder has 60 good looking HDs.

A lot of the network VOD shows are locked down so that there's no FF, or they expire, or whatever. VOD is NOT a replacement for a local DVR. It provides *some* of the functionality, and some VOD is good, like for HBO, but a lot of it is really lousy.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

For me to duplicate on cable what I get with Directv would cost $20-30 more per month considering the added dvr costs with cable and the tiering of sports channels and others on cable I already get with Directv in my base package.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bigg said:


> So the base TV package itself isn't that much cheaper on cable, if any. However, that's not the whole story, and the whole story explains why DirecTV has to be a premium service. With DirecTV, you have to pay $6/mo for every single TV. With cable, you can get TiVo and only have one box on their network, with TiVo Minis for the rest, or you can have DTAs for $2/mo, or on some older systems they still have some clear QAM or analog, although none of those offer DVR capabilities, so they're not that practical. But TiVo does remain very practical.


Wait, you're the guy who's arguing that you have to be an idiot to watch SD or not have a DVR, but now you're arguing that watching in clear QAM or analog constitutes an advantage for cable? So is SD good or bad, make up your mind. Other than locals, I've never heard of a cable system that has HD channels in clear QAM so I'm assuming "clear QAM" means SD.

Sure, Tivo makes things cheaper but according to Tivo around 1% of all cable subscribers bring their own Tivo. Another 5% of so get their Tivo through the cable company, paying monthly box rental fees even higher than a standard cable DVR.

Granted, Directv makes you pay per TV, but unless you are part of that 1% who brings your own Tivo, or can stomach SD and being without a DVR, you are generally paying per TV with cable as well, in the form of box rental fees. Even if you bring your own Tivo, you pay up front for the hardware and either you're either paying big monthly fees to Tivo, or you paid up front to buy lifetime service. You have to consider the money you spend your Tivo boxes and service part of the cable company cost, just because part of the money goes to another company instead of the cable company it is still something you only pay because you have cable. You aren't going to get a Tivo if you have Directv.



Bigg said:


> The bigger issue, however, is that for much of the country, cable is their only option for broadband, so the cable company has got them. If they bundle internet and TV, not only do they not pay the de-bundling surcharge, but they also get the bundling discount. This does vary depending on your location. FIOS has, over the past couple of years, made reasonable internet-only packages available, as do some smaller cable companies that aren't making much on TV anymore due to high carriage fees. However, even on FIOS, their bundles are pretty cheap. And of course if you can get U-Verse on AT&T, then you can bundle with D*. However, here in CT, Frontier also bundles, although not nearly as aggressively as cable does, and decent speeds are only available to a small fraction of houses that are close enough to their local VRAD. So it's not competition, but rather the lack of competition that makes cable much cheaper than DirecTV in many cases. My town has a local overbuilder, but most do not, so they're stuck with Comcast, Cox, or Charter, all of which make internet-only rather pricey compared to bundling.


Yes, bundling can reduce cost, but now that AT&T owns Directv you can bundle your cellular plan and save money. Maybe you say "well, I don't want AT&T as my cellular provider" but I don't want my cable company as my internet provider, and they aren't, so I don't think cable bundling belongs in the discussion unless you concede to calculating bundling discounts for cellular with Directv.

It doesn't matter to me, as I said I get cable because I can't get Directv where I live. I have it for my sports bar/restaurant but I will readily concede it is "far more expensive than cable" in that case as I have both and pay five figures for Directv and only low fours for cable (partly because I only have a couple boxes, and rely on clear QAM at the TVs. My cable company charges the same flat fees for all commercial customers, with no special occupancy based pricing for public viewing like Directv has, which is why the large difference (I think places with an occupancy under 100 would probably end up a wash) I have it mainly as an emergency backup in case something happened to my dish, or if rain fade hits during a big game on ESPN or BTN. Because customers would rather see the game in SD than not see it at all


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

Bigg said:


> That's amazing. Who are these people who are paying $70/mo or more an don't even have HD?!? I could see people with old TVs with antenna converter boxes, or cable bundled with an apartment or condo or something, but service that they actually pay for?!?


Or people with no line of sight for the HD satellites.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

crkeehn said:


> Or people with no line of sight for the HD satellites.


I would imagine there are very few people who have good LOS to 101 but lack it to 99 or 103. Not saying it can't happen, but it would have to be pretty rare.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> I would imagine there are very few people who have good LOS to 101 but lack it to 99 or 103. Not saying it can't happen, but it would have to be pretty rare.


And in the grand scheme of things, isn't a good enough reason to keep from progressing forward technologically. Lots of people can't get 101 at all. Those who can't get 99 or 103 would just go into that category, as unfortunate as it might be. (I know that's not really the focus of the current topic of SD only customers)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

If they can make reception of 119 purely optional or eliminate it entirely, that tight cluster at 99/101/103 would mean a lot fewer LOS issues. A wide arc across the sky from 99-119 makes it harder to find a dish location that avoids trees or buildings blocking the path to one of the satellites. Directv has been progressively eliminating the need for 119 as a requirement - if they haven't already eliminated the requirement to receive 119 from all DMAs which they've been working towards, they are very close.

The next step will be to do something about the CONUS channels it carries, mainly Spanish language along with a few Sonic Tap. Before they shut down MPEG2 SD, they will need to mirror the channels carried on 95 and 119 using MPEG4. There are several possible ways to do this, some of which would mean some action later this year and others that would mean nothing may happen until 2019. The big question that will drive that decision is what they intend to ultimately do with 119. We can only guess until they take the next steps and maybe then get a better idea of where they're trying to end up.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Keep in mind they could always use 119 for things like private/leased/business stuff, so they don't necessarily have to get rid of it even if they don't have any residential customers using it for anything


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

JosephB said:


> Keep in mind they could always use 119 for things like private/leased/business stuff, so they don't necessarily have to get rid of it even if they don't have any residential customers using it for anything


They could, but I don't think they have nearly enough of that to fill it up. Perhaps AT&T has some internal stuff they currently do with C band or whatever that could be migrated to Directv's system.

Like I said, a lot of possibilities, and I agree that abandoning 119 entirely seems unlikely, though maintaining a satellite for only 11 transponders that don't fit well with the rest they have is expensive. Maybe they could give the transponders at 110 to Dish in exchange for a long term deal to lease the 11 transponders at 119 using Dish's satellites so Directv doesn't have to maintain a satellite there, but they'd still have to find something useful for it to do.

I wonder if there are any special regulations about what those DBS allocations have to be used for. Directv is able to use their Ka bands at 101 for internal use, but I don't know if that would be permitted for their DBS transponders at 119.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> Wait, you're the guy who's arguing that you have to be an idiot to watch SD or not have a DVR, but now you're arguing that watching in clear QAM or analog constitutes an advantage for cable? So is SD good or bad, make up your mind. Other than locals, I've never heard of a cable system that has HD channels in clear QAM so I'm assuming "clear QAM" means SD.
> 
> Sure, Tivo makes things cheaper but according to Tivo around 1% of all cable subscribers bring their own Tivo. Another 5% of so get their Tivo through the cable company, paying monthly box rental fees even higher than a standard cable DVR.
> 
> ...


The deal breaker on Clear QAM or analog is really the lack of a DVR. SD is fine for a workshop or laundry room or kitchen TV where you're not really watching anyway. But since a DVR adds a lot of value, at that point, you're getting HD anyway. Really, the big advantage there is TiVo. True, a lot of people just accept the garbage boxes that the cablecos crank out, but the point is that there is an *option* to get something that's actually good, and has no additional fees. TiVo isn't much cheaper for one TV, but when you scale it out to 4+ TVs, the difference starts to get huge quickly. TiVo Minis are $150/ea, versus $6/mo or $10/mo for boxes for each TV, so they pay for themselves pretty quickly. In areas with FIOS or overbuilders, TiVos can also go from provider to provider and retain their OnePasses and recordings. Correct, that's my point. Because DirecTV hasn't made a way to support user owned TiVos, you're forced to pay for their boxes, and for each TV.

That's a ridiculous and false comparison. The discount is like $10/mo or something, and AT&T isn't a monopoly for cell phone service like Comcast is for internet in many places. Comcast, meanwhile, it putting DirecTV at a $35/mo+ disadvantage right off the bat due to their illegal and anti-competitive bundling practices. It's not DirecTV's fault, but DirecTV's only way to compete is to be a better service with more sports, more HD, more 4k, and better HD picture quality. They simply cannot compete on price with the cards stacked against them like that.

Yes, some areas in the 21-state service area have AT&T U-Verse that they can now bundle with, some large MDUs have ISPs that are MFH2 or MFH3 installers and bundle triple play with DirecTV as a part, and some people have local or muni ISPs that offer reasonably priced standalone internet, but there are a LOT of people who have VDSL, FIOS, or cable internet from a provider that uses aggressive and sometimes illegal bundling practices to push their own video products, and have monopolies or duopolies with either the only provider, or both providers aggressively bundling TV. So internet is absolutely part of the cost discussion for DirecTV. I actually looked at Cox and FIOS, and they have similar aggressive bundling to Comcast. FIOS is more reasonable for standalone internet, but their double play and triple play bundles are so insanely cheap that they may put DirecTV at an even bigger disadvantage than Comcast does.

So the bottom line is that DirecTV's value proposition is based entirely on being better than cable, not on being cheaper. Looking at the broadband landscape, and the markets that DISH serves, I think DISH is in serious trouble. They have competed on price, not on their programming. There are only so many customers who want international programming, or who live in East Bumble**** and can't get cable TV in a bundle for cheaper. There aren't a combined 34 million subs who want channels from East Timbuktu or live in East Bumble****. AFAIK, DISH doesn't even have anything in the MDU market, where DirecTV has a very appealing offering, and can have their integrators offer bundled internet with fiber to the building, and DISH does't have better picture quality, more sports, or more 4k. Maybe they have more HD channels.



slice1900 said:


> If they can make reception of 119 purely optional or eliminate it entirely, that tight cluster at 99/101/103 would mean a lot fewer LOS issues. A wide arc across the sky from 99-119 makes it harder to find a dish location that avoids trees or buildings blocking the path to one of the satellites. Directv has been progressively eliminating the need for 119 as a requirement - if they haven't already eliminated the requirement to receive 119 from all DMAs which they've been working towards, they are very close.
> 
> The next step will be to do something about the CONUS channels it carries, mainly Spanish language along with a few Sonic Tap. Before they shut down MPEG2 SD, they will need to mirror the channels carried on 95 and 119 using MPEG4. There are several possible ways to do this, some of which would mean some action later this year and others that would mean nothing may happen until 2019. The big question that will drive that decision is what they intend to ultimately do with 119. We can only guess until they take the next steps and maybe then get a better idea of where they're trying to end up.


Yeah, they should pull the last few english language things off of 119 and stick them on 101. Have they more heavily compressed SD channels that now have HD versions in the past decade? I would think SD channels that have an HD version should be absolutely compressed to the maximum, since the 5 people watching them obviously don't care what they look like.

Here in Hartford-New Haven, eliminating 119 for locals is a HUGE improvement. It got them from around 20 degrees above the skyline to about 30 degrees above the skyline for 99c/101/103c. They're still not to around 40 degrees where DISH is with 61.5/72/77, but it's a LOT better than where they were, since we have a LOT of trees.

I would think that it would make sense to keep CONUS Spanish language programming on 119, as that is a clearly defined use, they have a dish that can handle all 5 satellite, so why not? They need to take the english stuff off it though, and have a clearly defined situation when you need 119 (spanish channels). Everyone with spanish channels is already set up with 119, so why not? They could put more HD spanish channels while they are at it as they remove spot beams from markets like Hartford-New Haven ahead of the final shutdown of the top markets and CONUS SD in 2019 and revert those frequencies back to CONUS use. All the major markets are on 101 anyway for spot beams, so they may have spot beams off of 119 well ahead of 2019. Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock for the past 8 or so years has at least some of their TVs that can receive locals off of 99c/103c in markets like Hartford-New Haven, so switching a few boxes out for small TVs, and converting the few rock-dwellers over to Ka-band setups shouldn't be very hard in smaller markets.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bigg said:


> The deal breaker on Clear QAM or analog is really the lack of a DVR.


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882037001

Under $40. Just add a USB hard drive.


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> I would imagine there are very few people who have good LOS to 101 but lack it to 99 or 103. Not saying it can't happen, but it would have to be pretty rare.


What can I say, I'm special.

I was pointing out to Bigg that there might be more than one reason why a person hasn't switched to HD service. In fact I tried, only to have the installation people say it couldn't be done.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882037001
> 
> Under $40. Just add a USB hard drive.


True. I'm arguing against myself now, but that thing doesn't really address the DVR need, since you really need a whole-home system, especially on smaller TVs. TiVo does address that.



crkeehn said:


> What can I say, I'm special.
> 
> I was pointing out to Bigg that there might be more than one reason why a person hasn't switched to HD service. In fact I tried, only to have the installation people say it couldn't be done.


If you have trees that close to your 101 signal, they're either going to grow and block your DirecTV signal, or the wind will blow them into the LOS for 101. Secondly, even the crappiest HD cable is MUCH better than SD DirecTV, so there's not a valid excuse for not having, at a minimum, 99c/101/103c for ANY English language DirecTV sub. If you have the special international package just to pick up international channels off of 95W, and have it paired with HD cable or FIOS, then I could see not having 99c/103c. But not for English language. I do know a friend's parents who have a setup like that with 118 on DISH for international channels, but they get their english programming through FIOS, so AFAIK, they don't have a DISH 1000.4 to pick up 61.5/72/77, even though it would be easy to pie to do.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Yes, some areas in the 21-state service area have AT&T U-Verse that they can now bundle with, some large MDUs have ISPs that are MFH2 or MFH3 installers and bundle triple play with DirecTV as a part, and some people have local or muni ISPs that offer reasonably priced standalone internet, but there are a LOT of people who have VDSL, FIOS, or cable internet from a provider that uses aggressive and sometimes illegal bundling practices to push their own video products, and have monopolies or duopolies with either the only provider, or both providers aggressively bundling TV. So internet is absolutely part of the cost discussion for DirecTV. I actually looked at Cox and FIOS, and they have similar aggressive bundling to Comcast. FIOS is more reasonable for standalone internet, but their double play and triple play bundles are so insanely cheap that they may put DirecTV at an even bigger disadvantage than Comcast does.
> 
> So the bottom line is that DirecTV's value proposition is based entirely on being better than cable, not on being cheaper.


AT&T is planning to have "fixed line" wireless broadband nationally, not just in their legacy wireline footprint. They are also pushing DirecTV heavily into internet/OTT, which will tie in with their wireless services. The traditional home internet/TV bundle isnt the only or even main place that AT&T wants to play in. They have way more planned than just trying to keep the old paradigm of satellite TV going. Cable is quickly catching up and even surpassing satellite when it comes to channel lineup and picture quality, and even equipment/interface quality.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

JosephB said:


> AT&T is planning to have "fixed line" wireless broadband nationally, not just in their legacy wireline footprint. They are also pushing DirecTV heavily into internet/OTT, which will tie in with their wireless services. The traditional home internet/TV bundle isnt the only or even main place that AT&T wants to play in. They have way more planned than just trying to keep the old paradigm of satellite TV going. Cable is quickly catching up and even surpassing satellite when it comes to channel lineup and picture quality, and even equipment/interface quality.


We'll have to see what they come up with. This could compete with DSL, I'm not sure that in suburban and urban areas, fixed wireless can compete with cable or fiber. Cable still leaves a LOT to be desired. Yes, Comcast's X1 is less bad than previous boxes, but their picture quality and channel lineup is still WAY behind where DirecTV is. In theory, cable should be better, since if you split the nodes small enough and use SDV, you have unlimited channel capacity at the highest possible bitrate and quality, but that's not what the cable companies have actually done, so other than Verizon FIOS and Google Fiber, DirecTV remains the gold standard in TV.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

OK, I hope you've done with off-topic posting and we could return to main subject: *cease of MPEG-2 compression*.

So, I've another technical question: would DTV switch DSS mode to DVB-S/S2 on these tpns what carry now MPEG-2 channels ?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> So, I've another technical question: would DTV switch DSS mode to DVB-S/S2 on these tpns what carry now MPEG-2 channels ?


No way to know for sure, but I don't see why they wouldn't. AFAIK the only reason they have stuck with DSS is that SD receivers predate DVB-S2. While it is possible they saved money in some early HD receivers using older DSS/DVB only chips for the network tuner, they could work around that by sticking with DSS for the tpns the network tuner will need to access.

Using DVB-S2 would also allow the possibility of using more aggressive modulation/FEC to get more bandwidth out of their Ku tpns.

I think the fact they use DVB-S2 on the one transponder on 119 that carries MPEG4/HD programming makes it very likely they will do the same when they convert the remaining Ku transponders...


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Bigg said:


> ...
> 
> Yeah, they should pull the last few english language things off of 119 and stick them on 101. Have they more heavily compressed SD channels that now have HD versions in the past decade? I would think SD channels that have an HD version should be absolutely compressed to the maximum, since the 5 people watching them obviously don't care what they look like.
> 
> ...


Just to note:

All English national programming have been removed from 119W for a good while now except for a few SonicTap music channels like (and frustratingly) the "Holidays & Happenings" channel.

Outside these only Spanish and some other non-English channels are on the 7 CONUS+ xpndrs there.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> No way to know for sure, but I don't see why they wouldn't. AFAIK the only reason they have stuck with DSS is that SD receivers predate DVB-S2. While it is possible they saved money in some early HD receivers using older DSS/DVB only chips for the network tuner, they could work around that by sticking with DSS for the tpns the network tuner will need to access.


The first generation (or two?) of HD receivers were MPEG-2 only, so those have been long gone since they switched everything to MPEG-4 years ago....



HoTat2 said:


> Just to note:
> 
> All English national programming have been removed from 119W for a good while now except for a few SonicTap music channels like (and frustratingly) the "Holidays & Happenings" channel.
> 
> ...


What about the CCTV News channel, or is that Mandarin or Cantonese not English?


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

Bigg said:


> The first generation (or two?) of HD receivers were MPEG-2 only, so those have been long gone since they switched everything to MPEG-4 years ago....
> 
> What about the CCTV News channel, or is that Mandarin or Cantonese not English?


CCTV News is English.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bigg said:


> The first generation (or two?) of HD receivers were MPEG-2 only, so those have been long gone since they switched everything to MPEG-4 years ago....


They still support those old MPEG2 HD receivers (H10/HR10) as SD receivers. I sold a few H10s I had in storage on eBay a couple years ago, after verifying with Directv that they would activate them on a residential account as an owned SD receiver. Presumably they would still activate them on an older account that already has SD receivers (but not on newer accounts since they went to an HD install only policy in July 2014)

Obviously all MPEG4 HD receivers can receive DVB-S2 on their main (non-network) tuners since that's what they use for all MPEG4 HD transponders, but at least some (perhaps all) SD receivers can receive DSS/DVB-S only. Once they drop MPEG2, dropping support for all those SD receivers (including the H10/HR10) they will be able to switch to DVB-S2 for all Ku transponders. The one potential hiccup being the network tuner in some older model H2x/HR2x might be DSS/DVB-S only, which would require a few transponders on 101 continue using DSS.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> which would require a few transponders on 101 continue using DSS


if you would knew how many in use by APG propagation and FW spooling ...


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

AngryManMLS said:


> CCTV News is English.


Yep, it is .... should have checked with the TPN maps instead going off memory. 

My bad, technically at least CCTVN (ch. 2119) is indeed an English language channel still on 119W. CONUS+ xpndr 28.

And in SD "Squish-o-vision" too. Yuck ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> if you would knew how many in use by APG propagation and FW spooling ...


They use more than they need now because they can. If they had reason to limit it I'm sure they could reduce the number of transponders that the network tuner might have to touch. Anyway, we don't even know whether that is a problem, if the network tuner is DVB-S2 then none of this matters and they can cut everything over in 2019.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

before HR34 [genie line] these network tuners was cheap DSS (potentially, by FW update, not sure, supporting DVB-S, no more)
as to collecting to less tpns all the APG/FW streams ... I'm sure it will affect number of video streams dramatically


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> before HR34 [genie line] these network tuners was cheap DSS (potentially, by FW update, not sure, supporting DVB-S, no more)
> as to collecting to less tpns all the APG/FW streams ... I'm sure it will affect number of video streams dramatically


Not sure what you mean about affecting the number of video streams? If Directv determines they require a maximum of x Mbps for all non programming streams that the network tuner may need to receive, like APG, FW, NIT, ad pushes etc. then they can divide that by 34.2 Mbps and that's how many transponders on 101 they'd need to leave DSS. To help out the statmux maybe whatever programming they carry on those DSS transponders would be lower bandwidth like MPEG4 SD channels and Sonic Tap. All the remaining transponders could be converted to DVB-S2 and potentially use higher order modulation to carry more than the 34.2 Mbps max that DSS permits.

FWIW, the one Ku transponder in DVB-S2 mode uses 8PSK 2/3, carrying just under 40 Mbps just like the Ka transponders, so they could realize a decent gain in bandwidth for those transponders they convert, which would encourage them to select a strategy that converts as many Ku transponders to DVB-S2 as possible.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

we definitely going to speculate to far ... APG (include "NIT", etc - eg all SI tables) use redundant mode and spread between many tpns, using fast and slow spooling... we don't know all constraints of that decision ...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Spreading the data across many tpns is partially due to legacy mode requiring the mirroring of all data on both odd and even tpns, doubling the number of transponders used. Once legacy mode is gone that requirement vanishes. If some Directv receiver models did not include a network tuner, slow spooling across as many tpns as possible would be desirable as well. Do you have any information on how many transponders on 101 are spooling guide data in some fashion?

Suffice to say Directv doesn't have any incentive to change things today since there is no benefit, but they will once MPEG2 SD goes away. The presence of one DVB-S2 transponder on Ku hints there will be more someday. The additional bandwidth allowed by higher order modulation is a compelling enough reason by itself.

I checked the teardowns I found a while back and the HR22-100 and H24-100's network tuners are DSS/DVB-S only. The H24-700's network tuner supports DVB-S2. They will need some DSS transponders as long as such DSS only H2x/HR2x models are supported, but whether a few or a lot of transponders will be in DSS mode I agree we can't really guess without knowing whether the reason the "data" is currently spread across so many transponders will continue to apply once all MPEG2 SD hardware is gone.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> They still support those old MPEG2 HD receivers (H10/HR10) as SD receivers. I sold a few H10s I had in storage on eBay a couple years ago, after verifying with Directv that they would activate them on a residential account as an owned SD receiver. Presumably they would still activate them on an older account that already has SD receivers (but not on newer accounts since they went to an HD install only policy in July 2014)


If the HR2x/H2x's are an issue, then it's a moot point anyway, BUT the H10/HR10s are effectively long gone. The few remaining ones hanging around out there somewhere aren't a significant issue. I suppose a few could be in use just for OTA, but their days are numbered with RDBS pushing people over to SWiM anyway.



HoTat2 said:


> Yep, it is .... should have checked with the TPN maps instead going off memory.
> 
> My bad, technically at least CCTVN (ch. 2119) is indeed an English language channel still on 119W. CONUS+ xpndr 28.
> 
> And in SD "Squish-o-vision" too. Yuck ...


If you have the right video processor, you can un-squish. I've been doing this for a couple of years for ESPNU, which isn't available in HD on non-rebuild Comcast systems. You'd think they could find somewhere to mirror CCTV on 99c or 103c in MPEG-4 SD squish-o-vision. Argh.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> ... Do you have any information on how many transponders on 101 are spooling guide data in some fashion?


seventeen on 101 (14 are odd tpns) and one on 110 (tp8)and one on 119(tp26)


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Bigg said:


> ...
> If you have the right video processor, you can un-squish. I've been doing this for a couple of years for ESPNU, which isn't available in HD on non-rebuild Comcast systems. You'd think they could find somewhere to mirror CCTV on 99c or 103c in MPEG-4 SD squish-o-vision. Argh.


Oh I know ...

In fact the way I keep the DIRECTV receivers' display settings here with resolution on native and only 720p, 1080i, and 1080p (pass-through) checked and the format settings on pillar-box. All SD channels get upscaled to 720p and then squeezed back to 4:3, so all I have to do is switch the format to "original" or "stretch" and an anamorphic 16:9 SD image will be correctly stretched out to 16:9.

But it's still annoying as heck to have to do it for squish-o-vision channels. Especially on the newer Genie remotes which removed the format button forcing you to change it from the channel banner or the menu settings.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> seventeen on 101 (14 are odd tpns) and one on 110 and one on 119


It is interesting that almost all the odd transponders are covered but only a handful of evens. Any guesses why that might be?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

spotbeams


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> seventeen on 101 (14 are odd tpns) and one on 110 and one on 119


Darn it ... ;

Can't locate my PDF copy of the "fast PID" chart to refresh my memory on this. But I don't recall 119W having a designated xpndr for fast PID data.

Is this new change?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

HoTat2 said:


> Oh I know ...
> 
> In fact the way I keep the DIRECTV receivers' display settings here with resolution on native and only 720p, 1080i, and 1080p (pass-through) checked and the format settings on pillar-box. All SD channels get upscaled to 720p and then squeezed back to 4:3, so all I have to do is switch the format to "original" or "stretch" and an anamorphic 16:9 SD image will be correctly stretched out to 16:9.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I was using a DVDO EDGE, which has a TON of options for changing picture formats, including the ability to de squish-o-vision. Unfortunately, it will not survive the transition to DirecTV when I live in a place that I can put up a dish, as it does not support DirecTV's 2160p resolution.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> Darn it ... ;
> 
> Can't locate my PDF copy of the "fast PID" chart to refresh my memory on this. But I don't recall 119W having a designated xpndr for fast PID data.
> 
> Is this new change?


not I've remember ... see updated post above


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> Darn it ... ;
> 
> Can't locate my PDF copy of the "fast PID" chart to refresh my memory on this. But I don't recall 119W having a designated xpndr for fast PID data.
> 
> Is this new change?


Wouldn't they have to have one, so legacy customers tuned to a channel on 103/119 would be able to receive guide data? Though if they only have tp26, what happens if someone is watching an odd transponder on 103/119?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> Wouldn't they have to have one, so legacy customers tuned to a channel on 103/119 would be able to receive guide data? Though if they only have tp26, what happens if someone is watching an odd transponder on 103/119?


I asked P. Smith that same question once, and while I'm still a little fuzzy on the concept myself, from what I understand there are specific Ku xpndrs assigned at each Ku slot that spool out guide and other SI data at a fast rate or "fast PIDs" for rapid control information updates to receivers.

Whereas guide and SI data are distributed over all other Ku xpndrs at much slower rates as "slow PIDs" as though the packets were "sprinkled" across them so to speak.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I wonder if they have a sunset date for support of receivers in legacy mode, perhaps to coincide with the sunset of MPEG2 SD? Once everything is SWM they will no longer need to worry about the limitations of a legacy environment.

So here's a question I never thought about before. Does anyone know what transponder SWM tunes to for the guide channel? Since that's fixed (unless the SWM's software is updated) it follows that a single transponder is capable of delivering _all_ the information SWM receivers need from their network tuner, and thus only a single transponder need continue using DSS.

Once legacy mode is dropped, every other transponder could be converted to DVB-S2, since any data the receivers gets from them (software updates or whatever) is demodulated using the standard tuners not the network tuner.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> I wonder if they have a sunset date for support of receivers in legacy mode, perhaps to coincide with the sunset of MPEG2 SD? Once everything is SWM they will no longer need to worry about the limitations of a legacy environment.
> 
> So here's a question I never thought about before. *Does anyone know what transponder SWM tunes to for the guide channel?* Since that's fixed (unless the SWM's software is updated) it follows that a single transponder is capable of delivering _all_ the information SWM receivers need from their network tuner, and thus only a single transponder need continue using DSS.
> 
> Once legacy mode is dropped, every other transponder could be converted to DVB-S2, since any data the receivers gets from them (software updates or whatever) is demodulated using the standard tuners not the network tuner.


it's more complicated as no single tpn carry all APG records - eg "guide channel" is many objects constituting it: "SDT", "EDT", etc
so it would require switching between tpns - no one is carry all nets data ...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Interesting, so the guide channel is switching transponders? If you connected a PC with a DSS card to a SWM output and tuned the guide channel, is there a way to determine what transponder it is providing at a given moment? Maybe it follows a round robin schedule of some sort? You'd think it would have to be controlled by the SWM itself, the receivers can't control this because you might have 8 (or more with a DSWM) receivers connected to the same SWM, and you can't very well have them fighting out what transponder the guide channel should be tuned to.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> Interesting, so the guide channel is switching transponders? If you connected a PC with a DSS card to a SWM output and* tuned the guide channel*, is there a way to determine what transponder it is providing at a given moment? Maybe it follows a round robin schedule of some sort? You'd think it would have to be controlled by the SWM itself, the receivers can't control this because you might have 8 (or more with a DSWM) receivers connected to the same SWM, and you can't very well have them fighting out what transponder the guide channel should be tuned to.


as I did try to explain, there is no such "channel", and yes, STB does using "a carousel" to navigate to fast/slow PIDs on different tpns while SWiM executing STB cmds to select proper sat/tpn for fetching APG pieces;
fast PIDs would give a main part of EPG in less then minute.
I think why the server-client tandem become main stream - one of its advantage to reduce network data acquisition time and eliminate "a fight" for the SWiM channel#1 between STBs


----------



## jeffcarp (Oct 21, 2002)

One segment of the population that this rumor has caused some angst is motorhome users that have in-motion satellite domes. I'm not sure why technically but in-motion satellite domes can only receive DIRECTV Ku band satellites at 101° and 119° so they do not receive HD at all. Can someone help me understand what this SolidSignal rumor potentially means for this group of people?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

in short - collect money for new domes


----------



## jeffcarp (Oct 21, 2002)

P Smith said:


> in short - collect money for new domes


I don't think it's that simple. There would be absolutely no reason that the four companies that make in-motion domes would not be selling HD compatible KA band in-motion domes if it were technically possible, no matter what the cost. There is some technical reason why they can only build KU band domes.

So what happens if this is true?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

This isn't a rumor, this was announced by Directv at their Revolution conference last month to dealers and installer partners. It is official.

Just because an in-motion dish capable of Ka reception isn't available for sale doesn't mean it is _impossible_ to make, it is more likely that it isn't seen as a viable product. It would need to be larger than a Ku only dish to provide the same signal quality, and it would need to maintain its aim better since Ka allows for less error in aiming. Both factors would make it more expensive, and the more expensive it is the lower the potential sales volume. At some point all but the most dedicated Directv customers would be forced to say "damn, I could pay for a lot of years of Dish Network for the price difference of this more expensive Ka dish, I guess I don't really need Directv that badly!"

Once Directv stops broadcasting MPEG2 SD using 101, it isn't like they will stop using 101. They'll use it for HD channels, but exactly how remains unclear since it depends on other factors having to do with Puerto Rico and the satellites currently in use at 101. Eventually Directv will be contacting those affected with further details, and we'll know more. The in motion dishes will always work for Dish Network, so RV customers can afford to wait until pretty close to the deadline to find out Directv's plans, and still have time to switch to Dish if they don't like them.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Ku frequencies have a wide cone of acceptable signal strength. Inmotion tracking for Ku is non-trivial, but doable.

Ka on the other hand, has a very narrow cone of signal strength. Static dishes must be solidly mounted and fine-tuned to keep a strong signal. The in-motion adjustments to keep signal lock on an RV rolling down the highway at 65 mph are incredible. Potentially doable with predictive motion detection based on roadway knowledge.

Then think about a boat that can move in three directions at any given moment without any warning. Ain't no roadway to base a prediction of movement. (Yeah, eventually wave detection could help...)

Plus, most of the time with Ka one really wants access to multiple satellite slots simultaneously. So a phased array approach, which might be able to react quickly enough to track Ka, will take more elements to track multiple satellites in their motion. Huge computing nightmare...

Will it happen that DIRECTV Ka (and RBS for that matter) is able to be received in motion? Yes, technically. Not so sure commercially viably. By the time they get all the kinks out, we may no longer be using satellites to the home... (Or the RV/boat/plane.) 

Peace,
Tom


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

I though in motion reception of HD is possible right now with the KVH TracVision HD7 and HD11?
http://www.kvh.com/MarineSat/

They are just too big and heavy to use on RVs, they are only used on boats.

I think they could probably make them small enough to work on vehicles, but the market just isn't there yet. I would imagine most of the in motion dishes are actually being sold for limos and SUVs, and being watched on 7-15" screens so HD doesn't really make that much of a difference. Most RVs I would imagine just use the satellite TV when parked so they aren't all that worried about in motion use, and are fine with the auto pointing dishes that are available now for HD use when parked.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

Beerstalker said:


> I though in motion reception of HD is possible right now with the KVH TracVision HD7 and HD11?
> http://www.kvh.com/MarineSat/
> 
> They are just too big and heavy to use on RVs, they are only used on boats.
> ...


Air force one? or will the contract force them to have all news channels + DNS on 101 when MPEG2 is turned off?


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

Doesn't DirecTV have 32 usable Ku transponders at 101? The transponders do not care if they are broadcasting a MPEG2 or MPEG4 signal, so DirecTV should be able to move about 160 HD channels to the KU band. It would make sense to move the most viewed CONUS channels to the Ku band on 101 to eliminate the problem of inmotion tracking and reduce the outages due to rainfade.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

fleckrj said:


> Doesn't DirecTV have 32 usable Ku transponders at 101? The transponders do not care if they are broadcasting a MPEG2 or MPEG4 signal, so DirecTV should be able to move about 160 HD channels to the KU band. It would make sense to move the most viewed CONUS channels to the Ku band on 101 to eliminate the problem of inmotion tracking and reduce the outages due to rainfade.


Yes, DIRECTV has had licenses for all 32 Ku DBS xpndrs at 101W since their takeover of USSB's 5 back in '01.

And even without an inmotion RV solution, I would think DIRECTV still needs to eventually move a selection of the most popular HD channels to Ku 101W when MPEG-2 SD is shutdown for rain fade backup.

DIRECTV obviously can't just rely on the Ka band 100% on the time nationwide mainly due to RF.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

fleckrj said:


> Doesn't DirecTV have 32 usable Ku transponders at 101? The transponders do not care if they are broadcasting a MPEG2 or MPEG4 signal, so DirecTV should be able to move about 160 HD channels to the KU band. It would make sense to move the most viewed CONUS channels to the Ku band on 101 to eliminate the problem of inmotion tracking and reduce the outages due to rainfade.


Yes, doing that is not a problem and makes complete sense. The problem is that many of the most popular HD channels are also popular in Puerto Rico, but the satellites currently at 101 don't reach Puerto Rico at all. They'd either need to broadcast a second copy of all such channels using 99/103 or replace the satellites at 101 with something capable of beaming to Puerto Rico. Either by launching a new satellite or moving D15 from 103.

Replacing the satellites at 101 would also be nice for Hawaii, as they could use a standard Slimline dish for most installs since 99/101/103 would all reach there at full power.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> And even without an inmotion RV solution, I would think DIRECTV still needs to eventually move a selection of the most popular HD channels to Ku 101W when MPEG-2 SD is shutdown for rain fade backup.


If it were up to me I'd use 101 entirely for mobile use or rain fade back up. Fill it with Standard Definition and Enhanced Definition channels so at least some version of the content could be seen until the weather subsided. I would not do full HD as that would limit the number of channels that could be uplinked.

But I would only do this IF it was shown that Ka goes out so much more often than Ku that it would be worth the effort. With a well aimed dish I do not see Ku outages except in the worst weather (very heavy local rain or a storm between me and the satellite. How often is Ka lost when Ku is not also wiped out by weather?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

And d15 could move to 101 and take over all it's tps I believe and have the benefit of the mirrors to pr and such that thy don't have now at 101.... Correct? And they'd all be conus.... So add what six more conus transponders than are available right now from 101...

D15 may just be waiting for them to kill 101 and sell off the few satelites they have their now...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> But I would only do this IF it was shown that Ka goes out so much more often than Ku that it would be worth the effort. With a well aimed dish I do not see Ku outages except in the worst weather (very heavy local rain or a storm between me and the satellite. How often is Ka lost when Ku is not also wiped out by weather?


What percentage of 'outage time' Ka is gone but Ku is not we could only guess based on our experience where we live, but Directv could easily collect nationwide data on this via internet connected HD receivers/DVR. After all, every one that is tuned to an HD channel is receiving both Ka (the transponder corresponding to that HD channel) and Ku (the transponder providing the guide data) simultaneously. The firmware could report back to home base with the length of time the CNR for the Ka transponder drops to 0 both with and without the Ku transponder doing the same (ignoring receivers where the highest reported CNR didn't meet spec) I have no idea if they do, just that it would be possible if they required specific real world data.

I recall P Smith was digging around a DVR's filesystem and found a file that logged the CNR of a transponder over time. So they have had the firmware collecting similar data before for some purpose.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Deleted.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

In terms of the RV market, I think you guys are forgetting the fact that AT&T is going to have DirecTV-over-Internet services. These services delivered over their LTE networks and would certainly be AT&T's answer to this market segment.

Is it a good enough replacement? Who knows, we don't know what the mobile version of the service will look like. It very likely won't be "good enough" for some segment of RV customers, but AT&T isn't the kind of company that would let a few thousand or even tens of thousands of customers hold up major architectural changes to their plans because a third party product doesn't have a replacement available. I suspect that if no company has a Ka-compatible replacement, and a customer doesn't like the mobile product, AT&T's response will be "too bad"


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

slice1900 said:


> What percentage of 'outage time' Ka is gone but Ku is not we could only guess based on our experience where we live, but Directv could easily collect nationwide data on this via internet connected HD receivers/DVR. After all, every one that is tuned to an HD channel is receiving both Ka (the transponder corresponding to that HD channel) and Ku (the transponder providing the guide data) simultaneously. The firmware could report back to home base with the length of time the CNR for the Ka transponder drops to 0 both with and without the Ku transponder doing the same (ignoring receivers where the highest reported CNR didn't meet spec) I have no idea if they do, just that it would be possible if they required specific real world data.
> 
> I recall P Smith was digging around a DVR's filesystem and found a file that logged the CNR of a transponder over time. So they have had the firmware collecting similar data before for some purpose.


Almost every time that I lose the HD signal, I am able to watch the SD version (if there is one - exceptions like Fusion, Smithsonian, some of my locals) without losing the SD version for the usually short time I lose the HD. It seems like the 101 (and 119) never go away whilst the 103 and 99 do. I showed my friend the "show all channels" option for rain fade and he reports similar results.

My experience is one of 20 million+, so take it what you will,.


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

For rain fade I thought AT&T's IP distribution network was going to eventually be migrated in with DirecTV and if its Internet connected receiver it could switch to that stream and then back to satellite when the signal returned for a certain amount of time (to mitigate bouncing back and forth).

Still even with IPTV rain fade backup, or potential LTE or 5G / milimeter wave wireless Multicast IPTV via AT&T's R&D, putting most watched channels in MPEG4 on 101 makes sense for the mobile market. You sure can find a campsite or wide open waters with extremely poor (if any) cellular coverage so IP over LTE is not a solution in those cases.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Probably related to this - last week I called to activate a receiver on my commercial account and the CSR asked me if it was an HD receiver. Never been asked that before, and I don't have any SD receivers on my account and haven't for quite a while. If I would have thought about it at the time I would have followed up with a question asking if it was no longer permitted, or they were just discouraging it and letting people know that those receivers won't work for much longer.

But the fact I was asked for the first time ever makes me think they're at the very least now actively discouraging them. Not sure if it was because I only had HD receivers and they didn't want to create any new 'mixed' accounts or what. Anyone been asked something like this when calling to activate a receiver?

I've got another spare I'll probably activate in the near future so it is ready to go in case of a failure, if I'm asked again I'll ask about the reasons for the question. Though with CSRs who knows what they get told or untrue rumors that spread around the call centers....you can ask the same question on three consecutive calls to three CSRs and get three entirely different answers, in my experience...


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

inkahauts said:


> I for one would read into it as the end of mpeg2 and the end of two versions of a channel. It'll either be Hi Definition or if there is no hd it'll be a mpeg4 version in SD. But no more SD duplicates of Hi Definition channels.


I can't figure this out through research, use HR54, fast forward is smoother with sports on SD channels, for example MSG network, is that channel mpeg-2 or mpeg-4 SD? How long before a channel like MSG is no longer offered in SD?


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

GordonGekko said:


> I can't figure this out through research, use HR54, fast forward is smoother with sports on SD channels, for example MSG network, is that channel mpeg-2 or mpeg-4 SD? How long before a channel like MSG is no longer offered in SD?


If I understand it correctly, it is MPEG2. MPEG4 SD is pretty rare - some locals and a few PI channels.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

ejbvt said:


> If I understand it correctly, it is MPEG2. MPEG4 SD is pretty rare - some locals and a few PI channels.


you could check Gary Toma's spreadsheets for that ...


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

P Smith said:


> you could check Gary Toma's spreadsheets for that ...


I could, I have, that's what I remember, and it's not night-and-day obvious on there if you don't know what everything on there means, which I don't...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ejbvt said:


> I could, I have, that's what I remember, and it's not night-and-day obvious on there if you don't know what everything on there means, which I don't...


Hard cutting thru technobabble when you have little idea what you're reading, isn't it? A struggle I've never enjoyed. One problem is the folks that understand it can't dumb it down enough to get their message across to the...dumb folks (like me).

Rich


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

Rich said:


> Hard cutting thru technobabble when you have little idea what you're reading, isn't it? A struggle I've never enjoyed. One problem is the folks that understand it can't dumb it down enough to get their message across to the...dumb folks (like me).
> 
> Rich


The MPEG4 SD channels appear to have a different highlight in the spreadsheet, all PI channels. That would make sense since they need PI space on the 99 and 103. They kinda stick out and I kinda figured out on my own that's what they are. That's why I said, "if I understand it correctly" - you said it - no one has dumbed it down enough enough understandably for me to be sure. Some of these channels also appear 16x9 SD, even if your receiver is set to pillar box. The locals I am not sure about, I have just seen them mentioned in the weekly updates that they exist. The average user would have absolutely no idea about this!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ejbvt said:


> The MPEG4 SD channels appear to have a different highlight in the spreadsheet, all PI channels. They kinda stick out and I kinda figured out on my own that's what they are. That's why I said, "if I understand it correctly" - you said it - no one has dumbed it down enough enough understandably for me to be sure. Some of these channels also appear 16x9 SD, even if your receiver is set to pillar box. The locals I am not sure about, I have just seen them mentioned in the weekly updates that they exist. *The average user would have absolutely no idea about this!*


That's my point, I spent a few years teaching at a college and had to learn how to reach _everyone _in the classes. All the suggestions we give should be put out at a level that _anyone _can understand, not just the folks that have the background to understand the suggestions.

Rich


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

you lost me ... if someone start discussing something using keywords from relevant domain (sat signals) and understanding what is MPEG-2/MPEG-4/HD/SD/AR[4:3/16:9]/etc to ask where it, then why other part of the domain is not clear and prevent from absorbing knowledge of the tables ?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

P Smith said:


> you lost me ... if someone start discussing something using keywords from relevant domain (sat signals) and understanding what is MPEG-2/MPEG-4/HD/SD/AR[4:3/16:9]/etc to ask where it, then why other part of the domain is not clear and prevent from absorbing knowledge of the tables ?


? I hate to ask, but I must: Do you ever read what you post?

Rich


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

nope, just pressed many keys on my keyboard while watching some news ...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

P Smith said:


> nope, just pressed many keys on my keyboard while watching some news ...


Another multi-tasker, huh?

Rich


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I would say multi-channel viewer ...to many channels - cannot stop clicking on remote, duh !


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

P Smith said:


> you lost me ... if someone start discussing something using keywords from relevant domain (sat signals) and understanding what is MPEG-2/MPEG-4/HD/SD/AR[4:3/16:9]/etc to ask where it, then why other part of the domain is not clear and prevent from absorbing knowledge of the tables ?


Dude... what does this mean?


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

Rich said:


> ? I hate to ask, but I must: Do you ever read what you post?
> 
> Rich


No, he doesn't. Nor does he read what he is replying to.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

From what I remember, the MPEG-4 SD channel entries for both nationals and locals in Gary's TPN maps were color-coded redish-pink.

However, while all national channels are known and colored. DIRECTV's labeling of local market MPEG-4 SD channels is incomplete. And stopped back in January with 12 missing DMAs between markets 1-165. And 33 markets between 165-213.

I haven't looked at Gary's TPN maps on a PC for a good while though, due to the convenience of viewing them on smartphones. So I don't know off-hand if the color-coding scheme is still there since my smartphone Excel app. is not designed to display them either way. Whether they exist or not.



Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## bflora (Nov 6, 2007)

Rich said:


> That's my point, I spent a few years teaching at a college and had to learn how to reach _everyone _in the classes. All the suggestions we give should be put out at a level that _anyone _can understand, not just the folks that have the background to understand the suggestions.
> 
> Rich


My brother taught me that you can't make things fool proof because fools are so darn resorseful.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

If there's an HD version of the channel, the SD duplicate is always MPEG2, and that will go away in 2019. If the channel is SD only, then it might be MPEG2 or might be MPEG4, and if it is MPEG2 SD it will become MPEG4 SD in 2019.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> If there's an HD version of the channel, the SD duplicate is always MPEG2, and that will go away in 2019. If the channel is SD only, then it might be MPEG2 or might be MPEG4, and if it is MPEG2 SD it will become MPEG4 SD in 2019.


But didn't those markets with locals on 119 without HD versions have both Ku MPEG-2 and Ka MPEG-4 feeds simulcast to them?

Or has DIRECTV ceased this practice? ...

I remember this caused an issue with the receivers, because the "Hide SD Duplicates" feature couldn't discriminate to remove the MPEG-2 SD dulicate and leave the MPEG-4 SD one.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

GordonGekko said:


> I can't figure this out through research, use HR54, fast forward is smoother with sports on SD channels, for example MSG network, is that channel mpeg-2 or mpeg-4 SD? How long before a channel like MSG is no longer offered in SD?


We have no idea how much longer SD version will be on when there is an Hi Definition version. With that said I'd still never record an SD version if their is an Hi Definition version of the game. That's just not acceptable to me. I skip commercials but I don't ffwd the actual games.

Mpeg2 is smoother for ffwd than mpeg4 and I fully believe that's a choice by DIRECTV. They could make it smoother. They just don't seem to care to.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> But didn't those markets with locals on 119 without HD versions have both Ku MPEG-2 and Ka MPEG-4 feeds simulcast to them?
> 
> Or has DIRECTV ceased this practice? ...
> 
> ...


They did that so they could install all new customers with 3lnb dishes and thy could get their locals off 99 or 103. That was all about moving their locals off the 119 sat. And actually I think it was also for the other sat location too and I can't even recall which one that one was.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

inkahauts said:


> We have no idea how much longer SD version will be on when there is an Hi Definition version. With that said I'd still never record an SD version if their is an Hi Definition version of the game. That's just not acceptable to me. I skip commercials but I don't ffwd the actual games.
> 
> Mpeg2 is smoother for ffwd than mpeg4 and I fully believe that's a choice by DIRECTV. They could make it smoother. They just don't seem to care to.


I have a Channel Master DVR and it has a very smooth FF like the old SD receivers.
I believe they just chose too fast for FF! and makes it jerky because they are skipping too many frames.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> They did that so they could install all new customers with 3lnb dishes and thy could get their locals off 99 or 103. That was all about moving their locals off the 119 sat. ...


Yes I know ...

But it's been awhile since I last heard of this, and was wondering if DIRECTV is still doing this practice. And if the receiver "Hide SD Duplicates" filter was ever updated to also remove duplicate MPEG-2 SD feeds while continuing to display the MPEG-4 SD ones?



> ... And actually I think it was also for the other sat location too and I can't even recall which one that one was.


.

Can't think of any others, unless you're referring to the shutdown of locals from 72.5°W (the former "NET 7"). Which was a different situation not involving 119°W.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

inkahauts said:


> We have no idea how much longer SD version will be on when there is an Hi Definition version. With that said I'd still never record an SD version if their is an Hi Definition version of the game. That's just not acceptable to me. I skip commercials but I don't ffwd the actual games.
> 
> Mpeg2 is smoother for ffwd than mpeg4 and I fully believe that's a choice by DIRECTV. They could make it smoother. They just don't seem to care to.


So 2019 is not a definite?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> They did that so they could install all new customers with 3lnb dishes and thy could get their locals off 99 or 103. That was all about moving their locals off the 119 sat. And actually I think it was also for the other sat location too and I can't even recall which one that one was.


Yes, I think the idea was that they didn't want to require the SL5 dish for locals, by making sure markets with MPEG2 SD locals on 119 had copies of SD locals on 99/103. Not sure if they ever got them 100% filled in or if there are still a few markets left where SL5 may be necessary.

I noticed Stuart posted again at the Solid Signal blog stating Directv will be abandoning the 119 slot in 2019. Still not sure if that is something he was officially told by Directv or he's just assuming...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

GordonGekko said:


> So 2019 is not a definite?


No 2019 is definite as far as dropping MPEG2 SD, Directv communicated that officially over a year ago. We don't know when in 2019 - it could be Dec. 31 and there's nothing stopping them from pushing the date back a bit if they had some reason to want to do so.

I think what we're waiting on now is for Directv to make this policy explicit to customers - i.e. when do they start contacting customers with non-HD hardware like D1x, R1x and older and telling them they need to be upgraded. I would expect they want at least 12 if not 18 months, so I would expect to see something go out by next summer.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

jimmie57 said:


> I have a Channel Master DVR and it has a very smooth FF like the old SD receivers.
> I believe they just chose too fast for FF! and makes it jerky because they are skipping too many frames.


it would go too far offtopic, it will be better to discuss in other thread, say at dedicated thread of AVSforum
shortly (I did research the difference and found TR-50 aka your CM DVR), old technique of creating smooth FF based on Tivo approach - create IDX file pointing to I-frame; later model/FW avoiding the patent violation and creating/using IDX file with pointer to offsets in TSP file based on time interval 100 mS; that force FW spend more time to discover I-frame each step forward or backward
when I become bored by the jerkiness, I wrote a program to rebuild IDX files, make the pointers aligned to I-frames - FF return to smooth as usual


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> No 2019 is definite as far as dropping MPEG2 SD, Directv communicated that officially over a year ago. We don't know when in 2019 - it could be Dec. 31 and there's nothing stopping them from pushing the date back a bit if they had some reason to want to do so.
> 
> I think what we're waiting on now is for Directv to make this policy explicit to customers - i.e. when do they start contacting customers with non-HD hardware like D1x, R1x and older and telling them they need to be upgraded. I would expect they want at least 12 if not 18 months, so I would expect to see something go out by next summer.


what about the R22? I think that was part of the old time line for ending MPEG2.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

should be tossed it in 2019


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> should be tossed it in 2019


Why?

The R22 can receive the A3 format, since hardware speaking, it's identical to an HR21.

Policy-wise though you need another model HD-DVR activated on the same account for DIRECTV to enable the R22 to receive all A3 based programming beyond local channels in MPEG-4 only markets of course.

But all this aside, I agree that most would would indeed want to "toss" an old R22 by now, as it should be slow as molasses along with all the other pre-HR24 DVR models.

Heck, even the HR24 is close to being in the "toss it" group as well nowadays ... 

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

that's the reasons ...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bflora said:


> My brother taught me that you can't make things fool proof because fools are so darn resorseful.


But if you have to teach, you can get more across if you teach at a level all the people in the class can understand. That's what I'm trying to say, just that.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> We have no idea how much longer SD version will be on when there is an Hi Definition version. With that said I'd still never record an SD version if their is an Hi Definition version of the game. That's just not acceptable to me. I skip commercials but I don't ffwd the actual games.
> 
> Mpeg2 is smoother for ffwd than mpeg4 and I fully believe that's a choice by DIRECTV. They could make it smoother. *They just don't seem to care to.*


SOP, no?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Why?
> 
> The R22 can receive the A3 format, since hardware speaking, it's identical to an HR21.
> 
> ...


I see no reason for that if they are taken care of properly. I know that's a PITA, but if want one to work correctly...

Rich


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Since the R22 is really an HD receiver I would guess it won't be replaced in 2019 any more than an H21 will. The only HD receiver I think might possibly be replaced/obsoleted in 2019 is the H20, since it is more out of date than the rest (no HD guide and no DECA/internet among other things)


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

HoTat2 said:


> Policy-wise though you need another model HD-DVR activated on the same account for DIRECTV to enable the R22 to receive all A3 based programming beyond local channels in MPEG-4 only markets of course.


so will that Policy change? or will they just junk all older boxes by 2019? Maybe one they start rolling upgrades they can come to a plan? at least don't force people to re up for more 2 years locked in.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

JoeTheDragon said:


> so will that Policy change? or will they just junk all older boxes by 2019? Maybe one they start rolling upgrades they can come to a plan? at least don't force people to re up for more 2 years locked in.


When they obsoleted some very old receivers (mostly pre 2000) a few years back they contacted everyone with those receivers active on their account and offered a free swap for a newer one and it didn't extend contracts.

No idea how they will handle this one, we'll just have to wait and see. It will be a bit more complicated this time around since they'll likely be upgrading the dish for customers who don't have a Slimline so not all of them will be able to be handled by simply shipping replacement receivers. Until they start contacting people we can only guess how it will work.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

jimmie57 said:


> I have a Channel Master DVR and it has a very smooth FF like the old SD receivers.
> I believe they just chose too fast for FF! and makes it jerky because they are skipping too many frames.


Nah, it's recording mpeg2 if it's r cording over the air, which is handled totally differently.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I keep thinking we won’t see them swapping boxes till, a, it’s a year away or less before planned shutoff, and b, they have the hardware in place they want to be swapping everyone’s units with. The latest and newest that will run their next gen GUI they have talked about that will be the same on all their different platforms, which we may not even have yet in the latest new GUI. So I expect none off this will even start till summer or later...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I keep thinking we won't see them swapping boxes till, a, it's a year away or less before planned shutoff, and b, they have the hardware in place they want to be swapping everyone's units with. The latest and newest that will run their next gen GUI they have talked about that will be the same on all their different platforms, which we may not even have yet in the latest new GUI. So I expect none off this will even start till summer or later...


Have the hardware in place? You think they will be swapping out ancient SD boxes for the latest and greatest new boxes? That would really piss off all the subscribers who upgraded to HD years ago and have older stuff than what the SD subscribers are getting. I don't see it.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

inkahauts said:


> Nah, it's recording mpeg2 if it's r cording over the air, which is handled totally differently.


not true, MPEG-2 or -4 have same set of frames, just internally compressed by different algo, so it could be smooth (for example how BR player handle movie in MPEG-4)


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

For what it's worth, DirecTV's THR 22 (TiVo) actually does have smooth FF1 on MPEG4 HD. That's _one_ of the things that they got right on that unit.

Why not the other HRs (was it really a patent thing)?

I do seem to recall the early days of the HR20 that even DirecTV's MPEG2 HD sat signals also had a smooth FF1, but that was a long time ago...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> For what it's worth, DirecTV's THR 22 (TiVo) actually does have smooth FF1 on MPEG4 HD. That's _one_ of the things that they got right on that unit.
> 
> Why not the other HRs (was it really a patent thing)?


Well since the THR22 is the same hardware as Directv's DVRs (the HR21 I think?) it must not be related to hardware capability or the performance of the hardware.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

that would really point to tivo implementation of optimal (I-frames indexing) handling trick mode


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> Have the hardware in place? You think they will be swapping out ancient SD boxes for the latest and greatest new boxes? That would really piss off all the subscribers who upgraded to HD years ago and have older stuff than what the SD subscribers are getting. I don't see it.


I think it'll e for the latest platform and no way they are going to hand out HR24 and h25. They want to get what costs the least and performs the best for their value added stuff. Like pushed ads and on demand. You don't get that with h25 and to a lesser degree HR24 etc. so yeah I think the latest is what they will get without question.

That wouldn't piss people off, they can call and upgrade if they want. Not enough to worry about anyway.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> Well since the THR22 is the same hardware as Directv's DVRs (the HR21 I think?) it must not be related to hardware capability or the performance of the hardware.


Oh it's the software, no doubt about that in my mind. It may be some sort of patent as well about the process. Not sure.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I think it'll e for the latest platform and no way they are going to hand out HR24 and h25. They want to get what costs the least and performs the best for their value added stuff. Like pushed ads and on demand. You don't get that with h25 and to a lesser degree HR24 etc. so yeah I think the latest is what they will get without question.
> 
> That wouldn't piss people off, they can call and upgrade if they want. Not enough to worry about anyway.


What costs less, giving them brand new hardware or giving them old hardware that costs them almost nothing to provide? The money they make from pushed ads doesn't begin to pay for giving free stuff to their cheapest customers. The people who still have SD equipment in 2019 will not be the big spenders getting Directv's most expensive packages, or who advertisers covet.

They didn't give away new hardware when they upgraded the people with MPG receivers, why would this time be any different?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I think they make a heck of a lot more from push ads than you realize. I’m not just counting the general local ads. I’m also thinking about the millions of dollars they can get off of the political ads. That’s a big ticket. 

And yeah they will want as many people on the newer interface as possible. I think that’s another big thing as I said before. 

Look back further to the TiVo Hi Definition going away. People where given HR20 which was the latest at the time.

I also think the hardware they will be handing out will cost less than today’s hardware even. Minis cost them almost nothing I’m sure. And I wouldn’t bet on a hs17 being what gets handed out as the server. I expect something newer and cheaper. 

Also I’m talking about people who are SD only right now. I doubt there will be that many left. I think the people with Hi Definition boxes and one SD box will get whatever refurb h24 and h25 they have long around. Those are two different categories of upgrades imho. SD only people will already need a truck roll too.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> Well since the THR22 is the same hardware as Directv's DVRs (the HR21 I think?) it must not be related to hardware capability or the performance of the hardware.


As the name indicates with just the letter "T" added.

The DIRECTV HD TIVO hardware platform is the "HR22." ...

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

wasn't HR22 was the same as HR21 but with bigger HDD ?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> wasn't HR22 was the same as HR21 but with bigger HDD ?


Possibly ...

But in case there were other differences which I no longer remember, such as a different processor or something. I just posted the exact model number to be on the safe side ...

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

P Smith said:


> wasn't HR22 was the same as HR21 but with bigger HDD ?


That's the way I remember it too, but.... it's been a long time.
21-23 same chips.
22 500 GB verses 320
23 wideband tuner(s)


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Possibly ...
> 
> But in case there were other differences which I no longer remember, such as a different processor or something. I just posted the exact model number to be on the safe side ...
> 
> Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


FWIW: http://hr20.dbstalk.com/docs/Tivo First Look.pdf


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

According to a poster on satelliteguys, the transition appears to be moving along a bit further. He reported when he called in for a family member who has 4 D12s and spoke to a loyalty agent he was told Directv was going to "convert locals to HD only" (i.e. MPEG4) and all customers with SD equipment will need to upgrade to get them.

The upgrade options offered were:


SD to HD Upgrade: Genie and up to 3 Genie Minis with no commitment. All Advance Receiver Service charges waived until next upgrade.
SD to HD Upgrade: Genie Lite and up to 3 Genie Minis with no commitment. All Advance Receiver Service charges waived until next upgrade.

SD to HD Upgrade: 4 HD Receivers with no commitment. All Advance Receiver Service charges waived until next upgrade.

These are Genie 1 not Genie 2, and even if they didn't previously have DVR service before they will get DVR service free (along with HD & whole home) as the intention is that customers who currently have SD equipment only don't pay a penny more. Which makes sense since the upgrade is being forced upon them by Directv. If they have a SD DVR and are already paying for DVR service they will continue paying that and just get HD & whole home free.

I'm sure a few people will whine about how these customers will be able to get a Genie without paying HD, DVR or whole home fees, saving $23 or $25 versus what most are paying, but I guess that's the carrot after the stick of suffering through years and years of crappy SD 

Interesting the agent said they are converting locals to HD only and not everything, but I'm not sure you can read enough into a CSR's words to infer the fate of the CONUS channels.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CSRs are always 100% accurate ... 
Especially when what they said is passed though multiple people.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Who are the poster ? owner of that site ? then I wouldn't read it literary
Better if the source will be from DTV...


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

P Smith said:


> Who are the poster ? owner of that site ? then I wouldn't read it literary
> Better if the source will be from DTV...


It was a regular member of the site, not Scott. What does it matter who posted it?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

This still doesn't indicate what DIRECTV really intends to do with the Ku DBS band at 101/110/119W, or the WD Ku FSS MPEG-2 based feeds on 95W.

But does show some movement towards the end of the old MPEG-2 based DSS format, which we all knew was coming ...

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

HoTat2 said:


> This still doesn't indicate what DIRECTV really intends to do with the Ku DBS band at 101/110/119W, or the WD Ku FSS MPEG-2 based feeds on 95W.
> 
> But does show some movement towards the end of the old MPEG-2 based DSS format, which we all knew was coming ...
> 
> Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


I'm surprised they haven't migrated the 95° signals to 99° or 103°.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

We know 95* is going away because that satellite is old and the one replacing it isn't capable of the same type of coverage. We don't know where exactly those channels will end up, but it doesn't really matter if they are on 101 or 99/103.

I agree CSRs are unreliable but giving people a list of specific options tells me they've been trained on this and are reading from a script.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It is good to see actual "SD to HD Upgrade" loyalty offers - when DIRECTV starts to make the offers unsolicited it will be a bigger indicator. (For example, sending mailings with similar offers to existing customers.)


----------



## evotz (Jan 23, 2014)

[QUOTE="slice1900, post: 3498826, member: 515801"He reported when he called in for a family member who has 4 D12s and spoke to a loyalty agent he was told Directv was going to "convert locals to HD only" (i.e. MPEG4) and all customers with SD equipment will need to upgrade to get them.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I haven't read this entire thread.

Is this all local channels across the entire US? Or just locals for some users on specific spot beams? Any idea when this is going to happen? 2019? Or some time in 2018?

I know of a handful of people that still use SD and have SD only dishes and equipment. I've told them about this 2019 deadline. Any more specific 2019 date (1st quarter? 2nd quarter?) when SD will be shut off completely?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

No, nothing "officially" released yet about the SD turn-off ....

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

evotz said:


> Sorry, I haven't read this entire thread.
> 
> Is this all local channels across the entire US? Or just locals for some users on specific spot beams? Any idea when this is going to happen? 2019? Or some time in 2018?
> 
> I know of a handful of people that still use SD and have SD only dishes and equipment. I've told them about this 2019 deadline. Any more specific 2019 date (1st quarter? 2nd quarter?) when SD will be shut off completely?


Directv announced to dealers two years ago they would discontinue all MPEG2 SD broadcasts in 2019, but didn't provide a specific date. It will be all MPEG2 local channels across the US and all nationwide MPEG2 broadcasts (i.e. everything that currently comes from 101, 119, or 95) Every receiver that doesn't output HD will no longer be usable after that date.

Directv knows which customers have active SD equipment so safe to say they will be contacting them at some point, and offering them the same deal offered to the satelliteguys family member (maybe if they call and ask for loyalty/retention they can get that done sooner, worth a try)


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> (i.e. everything that currently comes from 101, 119, or 95)


and 110W


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> Directv knows which customers have active SD equipment so safe to say they will be contacting them at some point, and offering them the same deal offered to the satelliteguys family member (maybe if they call and ask for loyalty/retention they can get that done sooner, worth a try)


If those customers have a home broadband connection, AT&T will probably push them toward a free switchover to their upcoming "AT&T TV" service, although if they don't want that, then they'll try to keep them on DTV satellite with upgraded HD hardware. Will some of those currently SD-only satellite customers need an installer visit to upgrade either their rooftop dish or interior equipment/wiring?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> If those customers have a home broadband connection, AT&T will probably push them toward a free switchover to their upcoming "AT&T TV" service, although if they don't want that, then they'll try to keep them on DTV satellite with upgraded HD hardware. Will some of those currently SD-only satellite customers need an installer visit to upgrade either their rooftop dish or interior equipment/wiring?


I'd say most of the SD-only customers would need a new dish. And your comment about rooftop dishes is on the mark since many of those customers likely had their dishes installed at a time when DIRECTV installers would do a rooftop install.

I do not see AT&T making the suggestion to move to OTT services. If a person wants to move to DIRECTV NOW or whatever new service is eventually introduced (if any) it is better for AT&T than losing them to one of the many OTT service providers - but I expect their push will be keeping satellite subscribers on satellite where AT&T makes the most profit. (OTT is underwritten by the more profitable satellite services.)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> and 110W


110W hasn't provided any content to the US market for many years. Part of the US can't even pick up a signal from 110 any more, since it was angled towards Puerto Rico.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> 110W hasn't provided any content to the US market for many years. Part of the US can't even pick up a signal from 110 any more, since it was angled towards Puerto Rico.


I assumed what P. Smith was referring to is that whatever mode of transmission ends up coming from 101 and 119W Ku DBS as a result the MPEG-2 SD turn-off, will come from 110W as well.

Even if it is only for PR service ...

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

James Long said:


> I'd say most of the SD-only customers would need a new dish. And your comment about rooftop dishes is on the mark since many of those customers likely had their dishes installed at a time when DIRECTV installers would do a rooftop install.
> 
> I do not see AT&T making the suggestion to move to OTT services. If a person wants to move to DIRECTV NOW or whatever new service is eventually introduced (if any) it is better for AT&T than losing them to one of the many OTT service providers - but I expect their push will be keeping satellite subscribers on satellite where AT&T makes the most profit. (OTT is underwritten by the more profitable satellite services.)


You keep thinking of "OTT" as simply DirecTV Now, as it currently exists. But that's not going to be their only OTT service. AT&T is *actively* planning to transition the bulk of their customer base over from satellite and IPTV to OTT, including the higher-end OTT service that's coming (probably branded as "AT&T TV"). Uverse TV isn't pushed any more and, I was told by a local AT&T employee, will completely cease new installations later this year. Companies don't actively work to reduce their profits. AT&T believes it will be more profitable for them to have all of their customers ultimately on a unified OTT platform than on satellite. Neither of us is a bean-counter for AT&T, so we're not privy to the internal figures they're using to arrive at that conclusion.

If an existing satellite customer can be retained without AT&T having to spend any extra money on them, e.g. for another installer visit, then perhaps they won't push them toward OTT. But if they would have to send out an installer and/or a significant amount of expensive hardware, I'm betting they'll push the customer toward OTT. (But if the customer doesn't want that, then they'll fork out the $ to keep them on satellite.) I recently read an AT&T employee's post on another forum saying that they're already required to push DirecTV Now to all customers. (And how many TV ads have you seen this year for DTV satellite vs. DTV Now, complete with exploding STBs and big "NO SATELLITE" text?)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> I assumed what P. Smith was referring to is that whatever mode of transmission ends up coming from 101 and 119W Ku DBS as a result the MPEG-2 SD turn-off, will come from 110W as well.
> 
> Even if it is only for PR service ...
> 
> Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


I think there's a very good chance 110 & 119 will no longer be used at all after 2019.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

slice1900 said:


> I think there's a very good chance 110 & 119 will no longer be used at all after 2019.


Do you think AT&T is willing to give up their claims to those slots?


----------



## mjwagner (Oct 8, 2005)

James Long said:


> I'd say most of the SD-only customers would need a new dish. And your comment about rooftop dishes is on the mark since many of those customers likely had their dishes installed at a time when DIRECTV installers would do a rooftop install.
> 
> I do not see AT&T making the suggestion to move to OTT services. If a person wants to move to DIRECTV NOW or whatever new service is eventually introduced (if any) it is better for AT&T than losing them to one of the many OTT service providers - but I expect their push will be keeping satellite subscribers on satellite where AT&T makes the most profit. (OTT is underwritten by the more profitable satellite services.)


I didn't realize that Sony (PSVue) and Google (YouTubeTV) had satellite services....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> You keep thinking of "OTT" as simply DirecTV Now, as it currently exists.


No, I don't. Hopefully you can become a better mind reader than you are a post reader. You are way off base in your guess at what I think.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mjwagner said:


> I didn't realize that Sony (PSVue) and Google (YouTubeTV) had satellite services....


Who said they did? Are you also needing remedial reading courses?

What I said was that AT&T's satellite service was more profitable than their OTT service (currently DIRECTV Now, but go ahead and include rumored services that have yet to launch). If AT&T|DIRECTV keeps their timetable of turning off MPEG2 by sometime in 2019 then they need to move those MPEG2 only customers to some other service. Their choices are slim. DIRECTV satellite will continue to exist with MPEG4 services, it is the closest service offering to what the MPEG2 customers have now and it is more profitable than DIRECTV NOW (or AT&T TV).

Perhaps a year from now AT&T will have a profitable OTT offering (call it by any name you want). Regardless of name there will be satellite customers who will not be able to move to OTT and would be lost if AT&T doesn't have a satellite option. In any case ... look for AT&T to make the decision of what to offer based on what makes them the most money. They have been doing that for years.


----------



## mjwagner (Oct 8, 2005)

James Long said:


> Who said they did? Are you also needing remedial reading courses?
> 
> What I said was that AT&T's satellite service was more profitable than their OTT service (currently DIRECTV Now, but go ahead and include rumored services that have yet to launch). If AT&T|DIRECTV keeps their timetable of turning off MPEG2 by sometime in 2019 then they need to move those MPEG2 only customers to some other service. Their choices are slim. DIRECTV satellite will continue to exist with MPEG4 services, it is the closest service offering to what the MPEG2 customers have now and it is more profitable than DIRECTV NOW (or AT&T TV).
> 
> Perhaps a year from now AT&T will have a profitable OTT offering (call it by any name you want). Regardless of name there will be satellite customers who will not be able to move to OTT and would be lost if AT&T doesn't have a satellite option. In any case ... look for AT&T to make the decision of what to offer based on what makes them the most money. They have been doing that for years.


LOL...oh don't get yourself out of sorts....I was trying to make a joke, unfortunately the smiley face I tried to add at the end of the line didn't get added...try to relax and not take yourself so seriously... ;-)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

studechip said:


> Do you think AT&T is willing to give up their claims to those slots?


Yes, because it will take a long time after Directv "abandons" the slot before Dish can file to try to get it. I don't know what the rules are, but it may have to be unused for years before Dish can begin using it. If they couldn't start using it until 2024, is it really going to make much difference to Directv's competitive position versus Dish?

Another option is that perhaps AT&T will be able to come up with some other use for it so it doesn't go to Dish, but isn't used for Directv any longer. I'm not sure what the rules are regarding what types of uses are allowed for DBS slots.

If they want to prolong things as much as possible they can keep those slots occupied for a long time, by moving D8 (which has even transponders and can replace D5 at 110) and D9S (which was explicitly designed to be able to move to 119 where D7S currently resides) Both will be possible after T16 launches, and either goes to 101 or goes 103 to D15 moves to 101. Dunno about the remaining fuel life for D7S or D9S, but D8's fuel will last until 2034. AFAIK customers don't have to actually receive broadcasts to hold a slot, they just have to occupy the slot.

Its possible these slots were used as bargaining chips to resolve the reverse band at 103 priority situation. Well, assuming that's even BEEN resolved - we won't know for sure it has been until they start using reverse band from 103...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> What I said was that AT&T's satellite service was more profitable than their OTT service (currently DIRECTV Now, but go ahead and include rumored services that have yet to launch). If AT&T|DIRECTV keeps their timetable of turning off MPEG2 by sometime in 2019 then they need to move those MPEG2 only customers to some other service. Their choices are slim. DIRECTV satellite will continue to exist with MPEG4 services, it is the closest service offering to what the MPEG2 customers have now and it is more profitable than DIRECTV NOW (or AT&T TV).


Anyone still sticking with SD only equipment in 2019 is obviously someone who does NOT like change. So it makes sense to provide them the least disruptive alternative and tell them "we will come replace your dish, replace your receivers, and your bill will stay exactly the same" is going to be more attractive to them. The bigger the change pushed on them the more likely they are to start looking at alternatives and jump ship. With these people who are set in their ways you want to change as few things as possible - bad enough they will have a different interface to get used to which I'm sure many of them will be very upset about.

Add to that how as you say Directv makes more money on the satellite product and it is obvious why they aren't going to offer them streaming options.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> ...
> 
> If they want to prolong things as much as possible they can keep those slots occupied for a long time, by moving D8 *which has even transponders and can replace D5 at 110) ...*


D8 has even tps?

Only showing 16 odd according to the FCC docs.
View attachment Schedule S Tech Data.pdf


Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

James Long said:


> No, I don't. Hopefully you can become a better mind reader than you are a post reader. You are way off base in your guess at what I think.


Excellent come back, sir. You add so much to the conversation.


----------



## techguy88 (Mar 19, 2015)

P Smith said:


> Who are the poster ? owner of that site ? then I wouldn't read it literary
> Better if the source will be from DTV...


The offers are real. That's actually me who posted that on satelliteguys I mainly lurk there since I found dbstalk but its true DTV is offering SD to HD upgrades for customers that still have standard equipment. The rep said they don't have much info but the reason they were given is at some point locals will be in HD only which was the reason for SD to HD offers and the type of SD to HD offers vary based upon account.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> D8 has even tps?
> 
> Only showing 16 odd according to the FCC docs.
> View attachment 29228
> ...


You're right guess I got them switched around. Well that means that while D9S can go to 119 and take over, there isn't anything available to take over for D5. I doubt Directv is going to worry overly much about giving up those puny three transponders to Dish though.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It would take years of non-use for AT&T|DIRECTV to lose the licenses. They would make more money selling the licenses to DISH than playing keep-away. Assuming that the FCC et al would approve such a deal.

Even IF AT&T|DIRECTV walked away from the slot (the way DISH walked away from 148 a few years ago and let the licenses lapse) I doubt the FCC would assign the transponders to DISH. DISH may get to use them "temporarily" the way DISH uses the two unassigned transponders at 61.5 temporarily. (There is no customer content on the temporary transponders at 61.5.) The FCC refused to give those two transponders to DISH, wanting to reserve them for some future satellite provider. I expect the same treatment for anything that would open up at 110 or 119. Temporary channels only.

(When Cablevision/Voom used the two unassigned transponders at 61.5 they had to advise their customers that the channels on those transponders were subject to removal without notice.)


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

techguy88 said:


> The offers are real. That's actually me who posted that on satelliteguys I mainly lurk there since I found dbstalk but its true DTV is offering SD to HD upgrades for customers that still have standard equipment. The rep said they don't have much info but the reason they were given is at some point locals will be in HD only which was the reason for SD to HD offers and the type of SD to HD offers vary based upon account.


Does anyone here think it is possible for SD locals to disappear in 2019 but have the rest of the Directv lineup still broadcast a Standard Definition option?

I ask because on one led tv I keep the receiver on SD only because the dvr is smoother while fast forwarding through sports, not the end of the world but I hope perhaps we have a few more years left.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

GordonGekko said:


> Does anyone here think it is possible for SD locals to disappear in 2019 but have the rest of the Directv lineup still broadcast a Standard Definition option?
> 
> I ask because on one led tv I keep the receiver on SD only because the dvr is smoother while fast forwarding through sports, not the end of the world but I hope perhaps we have a few more years left.


There's a possibility DIRECTV may continue to simulcast national channels in SD so as not to alienate the RV, yacht, tailgating sectors. But in MPEG-4 (or A3) format.

So there is some hope. That is, if your DVR will FF and REW as smoothly on MPEG-4 SD as with MPEG-2.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

HoTat2 said:


> There's a possibility DIRECTV may continue to simulcast national channels in SD so as not to alienate the RV, yacht, tailgating sectors. But in MPEG-4 (or A3) format.
> 
> So there is some hope. That is, if your DVR will FF and REW as smoothly on MPEG-4 SD as with MPEG-2.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


Are there any current Directv channels broadcasting in SD MPEG-4? And is cable HD any different than Directv in terms of how the DVR fast forwards?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

GordonGekko said:


> Are there any current Directv channels broadcasting in SD MPEG-4? And is cable HD any different than Directv in terms of how the DVR fast forwards?


yes, check Gary Tomas spreadsheets


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

P Smith said:


> yes, check Gary Tomas spreadsheets


Can you have Gary prepare an inter office memo, joking, do you have a link please?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

GordonGekko said:


> Can you have Gary prepare an inter office memo, joking, do you have a link please?


Go to Edgecutter Cutting Edge Forums and look there.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

GordonGekko said:


> Can you have Gary prepare an inter office memo, joking, do you have a link please?


Download the latest TPN maps from the Edgecutter forum here....

Transponder Maps: Domestic, Mexico, Latin ~ Data 3/21/2018

Look under the "National" tab.

Note: While Gary use to color-code the MPEG-4 SD channels a shade of amber I think. I don't see them color-coded any longer this way.

Therefore, look for the non-HD entries in the list for the few channels with a Network ID of 10 or 15.

You also may have MPEG-4 SD locals in your market. I've got 2 in the LA DMA.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

HoTat2 said:


> Download the latest TPN maps from the Edgecutter forum here....
> 
> Transponder Maps: Domestic, Mexico, Latin ~ Data 3/21/2018
> 
> ...


I don't have Microsoft Excel, if anyone has a minute and can just report back with a few national channels, that would be cool, I found this but I'm not sure if this is up to date: Satbeams - World Of Satellites at your fingertips

It lists CNN and WGN as having mpeg-4 SD feeds.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

GordonGekko said:


> I don't have Microsoft Excel,


Install MS Excel Viewer, it's free.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

GordonGekko said:


> I don't have Microsoft Excel, if anyone has a minute and can just report back with a few national channels, that would be cool, I found this but I'm not sure if this is up to date: Satbeams - World Of Satellites at your fingertips
> 
> It lists CNN and WGN as having mpeg-4 SD feeds.


Here are a number of them ...

Baby ch. on 293
Nasa ch. on 352
GEBA ch. on 363
GTV ch. on 365
JLTV ch. on 366
Hope TV ch. on 368

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Oh, and while I like the idea of the information the satbeams website tries to provide.

Don't rely on them much, as their info. is usually very inaccurate. And I only use them as a quick reference for finding a satellite station's call letters. Which are one of the few areas of they provide accurate info. about.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

HoTat2 said:


> Here are a number of them ...
> 
> Baby ch. on 293
> Nasa ch. on 352
> ...


Thank you very much.

Update: It does not appear to fast forward at all differently from the mpeg-2 sd channels, of course it would help if I could test with an nba game. But there is a distinct way FF jumps that cuts into the flow of a game during dvr HD broadcasts that does not seem to be present on this mpeg-4 sd channel.

Hopefully Directv will maintain these past 2019.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I don't think the FF difference is actually MPEG2 vs MPEG4, but more how the encoding is done. Directv's MPEG2 SD channels are highly compressed (due to bandwidth limitations on the 101 satellite vs the number of channels they have) which is why they look crap compared to most other providers' SD channels. The difference in FF may have something to do with that.

I've long noticed in a difference in how FF works on my Tivo with my cable provider, Mediacom. It was true for my Premiere and remains true for my Bolt. Some of the Fox family of stations (especially FX) seem to have much more herky jerky FF than most others. Maybe fewer I frames are encoded there, I don't know. This is MPEG2 HD in my case FWIW. I haven't ever looked at the SD version of FX to see if it is different.

I don't think that many channels even have a separate SD uplink any longer, anyone broadcasting a separate SD version for those HD only channels is converting the HD version to SD (and converting it from MPEG4 to MPEG2 in Directv's case) There are so many possible reasons why you might be seeing what you see that I wouldn't assume that if Directv kept separate MPEG4 SD versions of everything post-2019 it would preserve the behavior you want.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

slice1900 said:


> I don't think the FF difference is actually MPEG2 vs MPEG4, but more how the encoding is done. Directv's MPEG2 SD channels are highly compressed (due to bandwidth limitations on the 101 satellite vs the number of channels they have) which is why they look crap compared to most other providers' SD channels. The difference in FF may have something to do with that.
> 
> I've long noticed in a difference in how FF works on my Tivo with my cable provider, Mediacom. It was true for my Premiere and remains true for my Bolt. Some of the Fox family of stations (especially FX) seem to have much more herky jerky FF than most others. Maybe fewer I frames are encoded there, I don't know. This is MPEG2 HD in my case FWIW. I haven't ever looked at the SD version of FX to see if it is different.
> 
> I don't think that many channels even have a separate SD uplink any longer, anyone broadcasting a separate SD version for those HD only channels is converting the HD version to SD (and converting it from MPEG4 to MPEG2 in Directv's case) There are so many possible reasons why you might be seeing what you see that I wouldn't assume that if Directv kept separate MPEG4 SD versions of everything post-2019 it would preserve the behavior you want.


Yes but the only negative FF I am seeing is with the HD sports broadcasts, I don't have a problem with any of the SD broadcasts, whether it is ESPN/MSG/TNT/TBS/NBA NETWORK, presumably one of those networks is down converting from hd to sd, if so then it is not influencing FF.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

GordonGekko said:


> Yes but the only negative FF I am seeing is with the HD sports broadcasts, I don't have a problem with any of the SD broadcasts, whether it is ESPN/MSG/TNT/TBS/NBA NETWORK, presumably one of those networks is down converting from hd to sd, if so then it is not influencing FF.


ESPN hasn't had a separate SD feed for years. Pretty sure that's the case for TNT and TBS too. Dunno about MSG and NBA.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

NashGuy said:


> You keep thinking of "OTT" as simply DirecTV Now, as it currently exists. But that's not going to be their only OTT service. AT&T is *actively* planning to transition the bulk of their customer base over from satellite and IPTV to OTT, including the higher-end OTT service that's coming (probably branded as "AT&T TV"). Uverse TV isn't pushed any more and, I was told by a local AT&T employee, will completely cease new installations later this year. Companies don't actively work to reduce their profits. AT&T believes it will be more profitable for them to have all of their customers ultimately on a unified OTT platform than on satellite. Neither of us is a bean-counter for AT&T, so we're not privy to the internal figures they're using to arrive at that conclusion.
> 
> If an existing satellite customer can be retained without AT&T having to spend any extra money on them, e.g. for another installer visit, then perhaps they won't push them toward OTT. But if they would have to send out an installer and/or a significant amount of expensive hardware, I'm betting they'll push the customer toward OTT. (But if the customer doesn't want that, then they'll fork out the $ to keep them on satellite.) I recently read an AT&T employee's post on another forum saying that they're already required to push DirecTV Now to all customers. (And how many TV ads have you seen this year for DTV satellite vs. DTV Now, complete with exploding STBs and big "NO SATELLITE" text?)


I don't believe for one second they plan on transferring over the bulk of their sat subscribers to the new over the top service. I believe they plan on doing that for all their uverese subscribers... and then selling it as a step up from DirecTV now.... but not as a replacement for all existing customers. Just new ones maybe... as an option where you have a limited number of tvs...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> According to a poster on satelliteguys, the transition appears to be moving along a bit further. He reported when he called in for a family member who has 4 D12s and spoke to a loyalty agent he was told Directv was going to "convert locals to HD only" (i.e. MPEG4) and all customers with SD equipment will need to upgrade to get them.
> 
> The upgrade options offered were:
> 
> ...


Easiest to start with locals and go market by market, then flip the switch on everything...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> I think there's a very good chance 110 & 119 will no longer be used at all after 2019.


I don't. I believe those will be there for Puerto Rico for a very long time.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Easiest to start with locals and go market by market, then flip the switch on everything...


DISH did it the other way around. They converted all of their national channels to 8PSK transponders and only started changing the locals over late last year. It is a choice. Market by market allows DIRECTV to focus on one market at a time but it also pulls some of the most watched channels in the market - which could annoy customers.

I'll bet that when someone's locals disappear we will see posts here about "DIRECTV is no longer carrying my locals" (which will not be true). DIRECTV will need to catch people as they cancel service and put them on the upgrade path.



inkahauts said:


> I don't. I believe those will be there for Puerto Rico for a very long time.


Puerto Rico has satellite service? (Yes - they are on the way back rebuilding what was lost in the hurricanes.)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> Easiest to start with locals and go market by market, then flip the switch on everything...


I don't know about that? I don't see what the big deal would be about flipping the switch. Get all the MPEG2 receivers off every account nationwide, then you flip the switch and no one notices (except for people who ignored repeated attempts at contact, I guess)

Theoretically all the MPEG4 only markets, like mine, have no MPEG2 receivers but in reality that's not the case. I had some D10s still active on my account until a couple years ago when I dug them out of storage and sold them. If I had MPEG2 receivers active on my account I'm sure others do as well, and those who have DNS or other means to receive locals might even have SD only accounts in MPEG4 only DMAs.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I don't. I believe those will be there for Puerto Rico for a very long time.


119 has never been used for Puerto Rico - it would have to be tilted at them like 110 for them to even receive it but since it is 9* further west that may not be practical. They will have no need of it or 110 when a new satellite is at 101, which will surely have the PR beam like all the other recent ones do.


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> I don't know about that? I don't see what the big deal would be about flipping the switch. Get all the MPEG2 receivers off every account nationwide, then you flip the switch and no one notices (except for people who ignored repeated attempts at contact, I guess)
> 
> Theoretically all the MPEG4 only markets, like mine, have no MPEG2 receivers but in reality that's not the case. I had some D10s still active on my account until a couple years ago when I dug them out of storage and sold them. If I had MPEG2 receivers active on my account I'm sure others do as well, and those who have DNS or other means to receive locals might even have SD only accounts in MPEG4 only DMAs.


I would notice when the service that I'm paying $120 for stops working. I would be a bit angry.

Due to LOS issues, I can't receive HD service.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

crkeehn said:


> I would notice when the service that I'm paying $120 for stops working. I would be a bit angry.
> 
> Due to LOS issues, I can't receive HD service.


Not much they can do about people who have LOS issues, though I have to think it is pretty rare for people to be able to receive 101 but not 99 or 103. Even if they keep MPEG4 SD duplicates of everything on 101 you'll lose local channels unless you are located (or Directv thinks you are located) in the NYC or LA DMA.

Either way I'm sure they will contact you and everyone else with an SD account sometime this year and let you know what's going on and what your options are. By then it should become more clear exactly how this transition will work and where they'll end up.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> I don't know about that? I don't see what the big deal would be about flipping the switch. Get all the MPEG2 receivers off every account nationwide, then you flip the switch and no one notices (except for people who ignored repeated attempts at contact, I guess)
> 
> Theoretically all the MPEG4 only markets, like mine, have no MPEG2 receivers but in reality that's not the case. I had some D10s still active on my account until a couple years ago when I dug them out of storage and sold them. If I had MPEG2 receivers active on my account I'm sure others do as well, and those who have DNS or other means to receive locals might even have SD only accounts in MPEG4 only DMAs.


I'm thinking about stock... push extra receivers to certain markets to get that market up to speed. If they did national channels I'd expect them to start with things like HBO and such first. But that might require a surge of product in the entire country rather than just certain areas.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> 119 has never been used for Puerto Rico - it would have to be tilted at them like 110 for them to even receive it but since it is 9* further west that may not be practical. They will have no need of it or 110 when a new satellite is at 101, which will surely have the PR beam like all the other recent ones do.


I see no reason they won't tilt those satelites for Puerto Rico. They will need something to mirror stuff off d11 and d12 (assuming d10 is toast) if they want to provide all the same channels and anything that is specific although I'd think their spot beams might be able to take care of the specific ones on their own.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Just missing three crucial pieces of info. from DIRECTV on these issues which leads to alot of speculation.

1) No formal announcement about the 2019 SD shutdown and its details.

2) Still no FCC filings on the new T16 satellite under production, even at its current late stage of development.

3) The previously rapid emptying process of SW1 has apparently stalled for some reason. With a good number of MPEG-4 SD channels spot-beamed to PR still being broadcast from there.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I'm thinking about stock... push extra receivers to certain markets to get that market up to speed. If they did national channels I'd expect them to start with things like HBO and such first. But that might require a surge of product in the entire country rather than just certain areas.


They don't need to do it by area or package, if they don't want everyone asking for upgrades at once they simply don't need to contact everyone at once, or even if they do and they get a surge of orders it doesn't mean they have to satisfy the order right away. They could service them first come first served, or accounts that spend more money go first, or choose randomly.

If Directv is offering a free upgrade with no commitment and no increase in monthly fees, people can't exactly whine if Directv tells them it will be a month or two before they get the upgrade.

I still don't think there's any benefit to them versus just switching off all the MPEG2 SD systemwide at the same moment versus doing it in stages.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> Just missing three crucial pieces of info. from DIRECTV on these issues which leads to alot of speculation.
> 
> 1) No formal announcement about the 2019 SD shutdown and its details.
> 
> ...


Like I've said, I don't think we should expect to see any filings for T16 since it isn't using any new bands, but merely replacing satellite(s) for existing bands. They wouldn't have had to file a construction bond on it like they do when the clock is ticking to begin using newly licensed spectrum, so no reason for filings/updates years in advance of launch like with all their launches for the past decade.

Once they are scheduling launch they will need to submit tech & test data etc. on it like any other, but I just don't think we will see anything prior to that.


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> There's a possibility DIRECTV may continue to simulcast national channels in SD so as not to alienate the RV, yacht, tailgating sectors. But in MPEG-4 (or A3) format.
> 
> So there is some hope. That is, if your DVR will FF and REW as smoothly on MPEG-4 SD as with MPEG-2.


I have been following this thread for quite a while now because it does have an influence on whether I purchase a portable carryout domed dish to use with our RV. According to Winegard (King hasn't responded to my requests for information yet), none of their current "domed" RV products support mpeg4 and the only one that does is their Travl'er rooftop mounted dish that runs about 1500.00+ install. So I am not so sure that it's an end to SD that is the problem for many RVer's, but rather that the equipment now manufactured for use in RV's, doesn't support mpeg4.

I also read somewhere else that due to differences in mpeg2 and mpeg4, in order to get acceptable signal strength, the reflector would need to be larger than what is used in the current iterations of the domed units. Would this also be the case?

So unless I am missing something else, if DirecTV does in fact end all mpeg2 (local and conus) broadcasts, this tells me that there are going to be a lot of RVer's as well as SUV/limo owners with in-motion units out there that will soon be the proud owners of a very expensive paperweight?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

It's doesn't matter for dish what video compression using MPEG-2 or -4
it's matter of LNBF and satellites together - Ku and Ka where is channels with MPEG-4 video compression;
perhaps it's matter of STB if you have very old one (MPEG-2 models mentioned here many times)


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> It's doesn't matter for dish what video compression using MPEG-2 or -4
> it's matter of LNBF and satellites together - Ku and Ka where is channels with MPEG-4 video compression;
> perhaps it's matter of STB if you have very old one (MPEG-2 models mentioned here many times)


But there's a question here ...

Is there a need for the electronics under the dome of in-motion devices to actually decode a portion of the satellite stream to operate?

Such as the unencrypted SI data?

If so then Winegard's statement would make sense and it would not be a simple matter of connecting an MPEG-4 capable receiver to a dome unit if there is a data receiver in the dome that is MPEG-2/Ku only (i.e. DSS) which is necessary to function.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> Is there a need for the electronics under the dome of in-motion devices to actually decode a portion of the satellite stream to operate?


Possibly ... but the part of the satellite stream the antenna aiming system would need to decode would not be in MPEG2 or MPEG4. The antenna aiming system would need to be able to demodulate at least one transponder on each satellite to be able to confirm that it was aimed at the correct satellite. Then it would pass the block of received RF directly from the LNBF to the satellite receiver and the satellite receiver would take care of demodulating the transponder actually needed to watch the channel the customer selected. The transponder modulation is normally QPSK or 8PSK with various bit rates and forward error correction (not "MPEG2" or "MPEG4").

An older aiming system may be able to demodulate QPSK but not 8PSK - which would render it useless unless the system found a QPSK transponder at the orbital location where the desired transponder was located.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

grover517 said:


> I have been following this thread for quite a while now because it does have an influence on whether I purchase a portable carryout domed dish to use with our RV. According to Winegard (King hasn't responded to my requests for information yet), none of their current "domed" RV products support mpeg4 and the only one that does is their Travl'er rooftop mounted dish that runs about 1500.00+ install. So I am not so sure that it's an end to SD that is the problem for many RVer's, but rather that the equipment now manufactured for use in RV's, doesn't support mpeg4.


As the others said, the issue isn't MPEG2 vs MPEG4, but rather Ku band versus Ka band. Currently Directv is using Ku band for MPEG2 and Ka band for MPEG4 (with one exception that's not relevant for this) When they drop MPEG2 SD, they will be using Ku band for MPEG4 so you'll be able to receive _something_ with your carryout dish. We just don't know what you'll receive.

Directv basically has two ways they could go. One, they could move a bunch of HD channels to 101 (maybe the most popular or maybe all of the ones that make up some of their lower level packages like Select or Choice) Two, they could carry MPEG4 SD copies of ALL their channels on 101. If they want with option one, you'd be able to get a lot of HD channels with your carryout, but there would be some you would have no way to receive - you'd lose some channels you are able to get today. If they went with option two, you'd be able to get all Directv's channels (even the ones you can't get today) but they would all be in SD. Better SD quality than Directv's current SD so it would be an improvement over what you have now, but still SD.

We don't know yet which way they'll go, though hopefully they have let partners like Winegard know...but those partners might be under NDA and not able to tell customers yet, who knows.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> Possibly ... but the part of the satellite stream the antenna aiming system would need to decode would not be in MPEG2 or MPEG4. The antenna aiming system would need to be able to demodulate at least one transponder on each satellite to be able to confirm that it was aimed at the correct satellite. Then it would pass the block of received RF directly from the LNBF to the satellite receiver and the satellite receiver would take care of demodulating the transponder actually needed to watch the channel the customer selected. The transponder modulation is normally QPSK or 8PSK with various bit rates and forward error correction (not "MPEG2" or "MPEG4").
> 
> An older aiming system may be able to demodulate QPSK but not 8PSK - which would render it useless unless the system found a QPSK transponder at the orbital location where the desired transponder was located.


Directv will always have at least one QPSK DSS transponder at 101, because the network tuner in some receivers that will be supported for years to come (I think even some models of the H25) is DSS/DVB only.

I doubt the carryout is as fancy as actually demodulating the transponders though. It would be cheaper and easier to just have it aim by signal power - you don't need to aim very precisely with Ku after all. Regardless of how it does the fine tuning, it would have to have GPS to roughly set the direction and elevation. At that point it would be close enough that it could wiggle around a bit until it found the highest signal power.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> I doubt the carryout is as fancy as actually demodulating the transponders though. It would be cheaper and easier to just have it aim by signal power - you don't need to aim very precisely with Ku after all. Regardless of how it does the fine tuning, it would have to have GPS to roughly set the direction and elevation. At that point it would be close enough that it could wiggle around a bit until it found the highest signal power.


If the device has GPS and an electronic compass and leveling device (stationary GPS alone will not ell you which direction one is looking) it might as well have basic DVB/DSS tuners. But it could work only on RF levels.


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> As the others said, the issue isn't MPEG2 vs MPEG4, but rather Ku band versus Ka band. Currently Directv is using Ku band for MPEG2 and Ka band for MPEG4 (with one exception that's not relevant for this) When they drop MPEG2 SD, they will be using Ku band for MPEG4 so you'll be able to receive _something_ with your carryout dish. We just don't know what you'll receive.


I understand what your saying and actually thought that might be the case. So I guess where my confusion began, and reason I came here for a clarification was more related to why the support tech at Winegard didn't make that same type of distinction in his response. His response was: "our carryout units and in fact all of our dome units are not MPEG4 compatible. The Trav'ler is the only unit capable of using MPEG4 signals".

Taking that at face value, it would make one assume that regardless of what band is used, if it is MPEG4, their equipment can't handle it. Or was I lucky enough to get a tech at Winegard that is trained about as well as a first line DirecTV customer support rep! ;-) That's why I came to the "experts"!

Thanks for the clarification everyone. Much appreciated!


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

I think what Winegard support tech. is doing is referring to the DBS Ku band as "MPEG-2" and the Ka band as "MPEG-4." Since those are the program compression formats DIRECTV overwhelmingly uses on those bands respectively.

It's technically incorrect to refer to a frequency band by a compression format used on it, as they're total non-sequiturs of course. But I have heard many refer to DIRECTV's satellite feeds this way.

Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

each DTV transponder carry "beacon" unique info by PID 0810, so getting lock and set demod correctly does allow dome's controller parse the PID's data and get "anchored" to correct sat/tpn when you select your desired program;
as you can clearly see the process doesn't require any MPEG decompression or descrambling; just cheap simple sat tv tuner with a chip supporting DSS mode is must (and really using as I've seen it with a conversation with one of european mfg who did try get into US marine sat market)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> I think what Winegard support tech. is doing is referring to the DBS Ku band as "MPEG-2" and the Ka band as "MPEG-4." Since those are the program compression formats DIRECTV overwhelmingly uses on those bands respectively.


I agree. That appears to be the error in what the Winegard tech is saying.

DIRECTV in your RV! Winegard Mobile DIRECTV Sales
Note how the three antennas are listed as DIRECTV SD and the TRAV'LER is listed as DIRECTV SD/HD. Matching that to what the tech said they were confusing MPEG4 for HD. And the full story is that the TRAV'LER can receive Ka and the other three antennas cannot.

(If one wants to get picky the three antennas listed as DIRECTV SD are also listed as DISH SD/HD. DISH uses MPEG4 for their HD so the antenna is obviously capable of passing a signal carrying an MPEG4 channel. What the three dishes are not capable of doing, as HoTat2 stated, is receiving the Ka satellites where DIRECTV currently transmits their HD signals.)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Directv's dealer conference is later this month, there's pretty good chance they'll announce further information on the MPEG2 transition as far as timeline and what will happen after. If you can I'd wait a few weeks and hope someone who attends shares what they learned with the rest of us. You might be able to make a more informed decision by waiting a bit, even if Winegard's tech support can't give you the answers you seek.


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Directv's dealer conference is later this month, there's pretty good chance they'll announce further information on the MPEG2 transition as far as timeline and what will happen after. If you can I'd wait a few weeks and hope someone who attends shares what they learned with the rest of us. You might be able to make a more informed decision by waiting a bit, even if Winegard's tech support can't give you the answers you seek.


Waiting a while is what I have already planned on doing. The purchase of a carryout was to be more of a convenience than a necessity. I just find it strange that being this close to the transition, that a manufacturer of DirecTV compatible equipment like Winegard wouldn't know if there was going to be an issue or not. If there wasn't, why not just say so and be done with it? Being an optimistic pessimist, especially when it comes to anything "ATT", I want to believe that they already know that there won't be an issue and just doesn't think it necessary to make any information public yet. But then when I take into consideration, my past experiences with ATT via Worldnet internet service, U-verse, and landlines, nothing would surprise me at this point such as already knowing that the loss of revenue from RV users will be more than offset by operation efficiencies to be gained by the transition and they are keeping silent to keep many from just jumping ship now vs. next year.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

There's a good chance Winegard knows exactly what Directv's plans are, but perhaps aren't allowed to say anything yet until Directv informs its dealers, techs, etc.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

DIRECTV hasn’t really announced anything other than they hope to get rid of mpeg2 in 2019, and that was said what, a year or two ago... that’s it... I wouldn’t worry about anything at this point, it took them a year longer than they said just to get rid of mpeg2 Hi Definition! And they made the changeover process for that take over a year as well.. you will have plenty of time to deal with whatever happens..


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> DIRECTV hasn't really announced anything other than they hope to get rid of mpeg2 in 2019, and that was said what, a year or two ago... that's it... I wouldn't worry about anything at this point, it took them a year longer than they said just to get rid of mpeg2 Hi Definition! And they made the changeover process for that take over a year as well.. you will have plenty of time to deal with whatever happens..


They announced they'd discontinue MPEG2 SD broadcasts in 2019. There was no "hope" qualifier in that, though I agree that it is possible that if they're behind whatever internal schedule they're operating off they might let the timetable slide.

Wasn't discontinuing MPEG2 HD broadcasts dependent on satellite launches? Those always fall behind schedule, so if there is a component of the MPEG2 SD shutdown that depends on having T16 launched, for example, a schedule slip is almost a certainty. They never get their satellites launched at the time they originally planned.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> Wasn't discontinuing MPEG2 HD broadcasts dependent on satellite launches? Those always fall behind schedule, so if there is a component of the MPEG2 SD shutdown that depends on having T16 launched, for example, a schedule slip is almost a certainty. They never get their satellites launched at the time they originally planned.


Why would T16 be necessary? You shut of MPEG2 SD feeds and replace them with MPEG4 HD (or SD), the sats don't care it's just zero and ones to them.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

RAD said:


> Why would T16 be necessary? You shut of MPEG2 SD feeds and replace them with MPEG4 HD (or SD),* the sats don't care it's just zero and ones to them*.


Absolutely different domain - it's purely RF equipment, so freq, bandwidth, amplifiers, transponders, etc
No bits/bytes processing at all.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I was using it more as example, but T16 might be needed depending on their plans for how things work after, like if they want Puerto Rico to be able to receive 101 (i.e. if they plan to decommission 110 & 119)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

In my opinion, DIRECTV will need to free up one transponder to start the transition. A flash cut "today they are in MPEG2, tomorrow they are gone (unless you have MPEG4)" would not be my recommendation. Perhaps move the MPEG2 feeds to temporary channel numbers so when customers call to complain about the "missing" channels they can be given the temporary channels until their personal transition is complete. That would require space for the existing MPEG2 feeds as well as the new MPEG4 feeds.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> In my opinion, DIRECTV will need to free up one transponder to start the transition. A flash cut "today they are in MPEG2, tomorrow they are gone (unless you have MPEG4)" would not be my recommendation. Perhaps move the MPEG2 feeds to temporary channel numbers so when customers call to complain about the "missing" channels they can be given the temporary channels until their personal transition is complete. That would require space for the existing MPEG2 feeds as well as the new MPEG4 feeds.


If they simply drop the SD duplicates the "flash cut" would be shutting down all those channels. If I were them I'd add crawl to all MPEG2 SD channels the last few weeks before the big day (after they've got everyone they could and just have people who have ignored previous attempts at contact or have invalid contact info) telling people they need to call Directv at 1-800-whatever or they will lose service on such-and-such a date. If people ignore that then its on them when they get cut off, I'm not sure what more Directv could do.

If they are going to replace MPEG2 SD duplicates with MPEG4 SD duplicates then I agree they can't do a flash cut, but even one transponder at a time could easily be done over a weekend if they wanted to get it done. Or they could take two months if they want to take the lazy way. I don't see what the incentive would be to take their time though, if they want to push people along putting a crawl on every channel is at least as effective as making them slowly disappear over time.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

I kind of agree with both methods. I would crawl the MPEG 2 channels for 2-3 months telling people they need to change out equipment. If at that point they haven’t switched then cut the cord on them and let them call to complain. Some people will be stubborn to the end for the hell of it and your going to have to force some people


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I wonder how many RV customers do not have Ka antennas. The RV customers would be a good reason to continue to have SD mirrors in MPEG4 while the MPEG2 SD channels are taken away. Once everything is converted to MPEG4 there should be enough transponders opened up to look at "selected HD channels" or whatever AT&T decides to do with the bandwidth.

Some day we will have an actual announcement directed at the affected customers ... The conversation will be come less academic when AT&T|DIRECTV sends out a mailing/bill insert/email warning customers that they MUST upgrade.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

and ATT have plenty of time, this year and whole 2019... taking deep-deep-deep breath


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> They announced they'd discontinue MPEG2 SD broadcasts in 2019. There was no "hope" qualifier in that, though I agree that it is possible that if they're behind whatever internal schedule they're operating off they might let the timetable slide.
> 
> Wasn't discontinuing MPEG2 HD broadcasts dependent on satellite launches? Those always fall behind schedule, so if there is a component of the MPEG2 SD shutdown that depends on having T16 launched, for example, a schedule slip is almost a certainty. They never get their satellites launched at the time they originally planned.


Announcing that one time isn't much imho without any updates of any kind. Like you said maybe we will hear some soon...

They couldn't kill mpeg2 Hi Definition till they had the new satelites up sure, but the satelites where up and running with the same feeds in mpeg4 for over a year before they finally killed the dupes. Heck may have been close to two years. And they took even longer to kill off the duplicate dns feeds. I believe that was caused by some MDU places still having to get new dishes and that took longer.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

James Long said:


> I wonder how many RV customers do not have Ka antennas. The RV customers would be a good reason to continue to have SD mirrors in MPEG4 while the MPEG2 SD channels are taken away. Once everything is converted to MPEG4 there should be enough transponders opened up to look at "selected HD channels" or whatever AT&T decides to do with the bandwidth.
> 
> Some day we will have an actual announcement directed at the affected customers ... The conversation will be come less academic when AT&T|DIRECTV sends out a mailing/bill insert/email warning customers that they MUST upgrade.


I can't think of one good reason to have mpeg4 duplicates.

Move the core Hi Definition to 101 and you are set. And do that right away.

As for the process, crawls would be good for 30 days maybe for any channel about to lose its duplicate.

I still think choosing to do it by package may be best. For example stop Cinemax in mpeg2. Then HBO and so forth. Then any channels just in ultimate package. And so on.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> I can't think of one good reason to have mpeg4 duplicates.


They are really SD duplicates of HD channels that customers without a Ka dish would not see



inkahauts said:


> Move the core Hi Definition to 101 and you are set. And do that right away.


There isn't room to do that "right away".

It is easy to be caviler about dropping channels one does not watch (in this case SD duplicates of HD channels that are received via Ka).


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I can't think of one good reason to have mpeg4 duplicates.


RVs and boats. A Ku/Ka dish costs a lot more for them than a Ku only dish. They may not care enough about those markets, or maybe if Ku only was no longer an option the increased sales of Ku/Ka dishes would make the price come down.

Or maybe enough people would be happy with ~150 HD channels on a 101 only dish and not care that the rest of the channels couldn't be received at all unless they had a Ku/Ka dish.

Several possibilities they could go with, hopefully we will get more clarity soon.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

On another thread someone mentioned this is being discussed in the irv2.com forum so I took a quick look, and found a post where it was stated they had received an email from Directv on 4/17 that on 4/30/2019 they'd no longer be able to view programming with their current equipment.

So if this is confirmed, it sounds like we finally have a date.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> On another thread someone mentioned this is being discussed in the irv2.com forum so I took a quick look, and found a post where it was stated they had received an email from Directv on 4/17 that on 4/30/2019 they'd no longer be able to view programming with their current equipment.
> 
> So if this is confirmed, it sounds like we finally have a date.


Interesting if confirmed to be correct ...

But still leaves the question of "a date" for what specifically regarding the DBS Ku band?

MPEG-4 SD or simulcasts of popular HD channels?

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> Interesting if confirmed to be correct ...
> 
> But still leaves the question of "a date" for what specifically regarding the DBS Ku band?
> 
> MPEG-4 SD or simulcasts of popular HD channels?


Yeah, some details of what we'd end up with one May 1 2019 would still be left up in the air, but at least having a date is something.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

James Long said:


> They are really SD duplicates of HD channels that customers without a Ka dish would not see
> 
> There isn't room to do that "right away".
> 
> It is easy to be caviler about dropping channels one does not watch (in this case SD duplicates of HD channels that are received via Ka).


Maybe I wasn't clear enough... there is zero reason to keep all the SD duplicates if you have a Hi Definition version of the channel on 101... which should be possible for the core channels... not all channels but the core ones. Plenty to put together a rv package.

We have seen they can move a channel from one transponder on one sat to another on a different sat with the flip of a switch, so this is something they can do instantly for a channel. They just have to have everyone's equipment upgraded first. But since they would be also changing the moeg2 to mpeg2 4 on the sat, I'd suspect they would want to utilize a free transponder and move a few hd channels to 101, then kill the mpeg2 SD version... not sure if they can flip the switch that fast if it utilizing different compressions.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> RVs and boats. A Ku/Ka dish costs a lot more for them than a Ku only dish. They may not care enough about those markets, or maybe if Ku only was no longer an option the increased sales of Ku/Ka dishes would make the price come down.
> 
> Or maybe enough people would be happy with ~150 HD channels on a 101 only dish and not care that the rest of the channels couldn't be received at all unless they had a Ku/Ka dish.
> 
> Several possibilities they could go with, hopefully we will get more clarity soon.


I'm fully suggesting the latter... have a core set of channels on 101 in Hi Definition... create a rv package, be done with it. Heck, I'd even suggest they make 2 of each premiums available on 101 so that people could get a reduced rate premium package with a rv package...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> there is zero reason to keep all the SD duplicates if you have a Hi Definition version of the channel on 101...


That is a big if. Lets put it this way ... all channels on 101 must remain on 101 in some format. Failure to maintain channels on 101 will lead to lost customers and lost revenue.

Once all the MPEG2 SD is converted to MPEG4 there will be some space available for additional channels but any attempt to create a "core HD" package on 101 would be very limited. MPEG4 does not provide infinite bandwidth.



inkahauts said:


> We have seen they can move a channel from one transponder on one sat to another on a different sat with the flip of a switch, so this is something they can do instantly for a channel.


What you are not seeing or ignoring is how DIRECTV makes such a switch appear instant. A lot occurs before that keystoke makes the channel change occur in an instant on your receiver.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

James Long said:


> That is a big if. Lets put it this way ... all channels on 101 must remain on 101 in some format. Failure to maintain channels on 101 will lead to lost customers and lost revenue.
> 
> Once all the MPEG2 SD is converted to MPEG4 there will be some space available for additional channels but any attempt to create a "core HD" package on 101 would be very limited. MPEG4 does not provide infinite bandwidth.
> 
> What you are not seeing or ignoring is how DIRECTV makes such a switch appear instant. A lot occurs before that keystoke makes the channel change occur in an instant on your receiver.


So mpeg4 provides more room for channels than mpeg2, and Directv already has a "core SD" package on 101. Why then can't they have a core HD package on 101 after converting to mpeg4?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Isn't the whole thread did touch the point a few times ?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

studechip said:


> So mpeg4 provides more room for channels than mpeg2, and Directv already has a "core SD" package on 101. Why then can't they have a core HD package on 101 after converting to mpeg4?


Yes, but the SD core-to-total disparity is tiny compared what an HD core one would be.

It's been estimated there's a capacity of ~150 HD channels for 101W if all 32 tps. can be used. But as the latest data grab of 4/18/18 there are 265 full-time HD channels.

So with the "one person's garbbage is another's treasure" in mind, and possibly contractual problems with some distributors who might insist on the same package deal for carridge of all their channels on the Ku band as the Ka.

Who gets included in the HD core and who doesn't?

Also as a sidenote to whichever way DIRECTV goes on this. The receivers' duplicate channel filtering software must be changed some way to be based on frequency band instead of compression format.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

HoTat2 said:


> Yes, but the SD core-to-total disparity is tiny compared what an HD core one would be.
> 
> It's been estimated there's a capacity of ~150 HD channels for 101W if all 32 tps. can be used. But as the latest data grab of 4/18/18 there are 265 full-time HD channels.
> 
> ...


I would assume whatever is in sd on 101 would be available in hd, hence the umbrella of core hd channels. With the extra room afforded by using mpeg4 over mpeg2, additional hd channels could be offered in that core group.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

studechip said:


> I would assume whatever is in sd on 101 would be available in hd, hence the umbrella of core hd channels. With the extra room afforded by using mpeg4 over mpeg2, additional hd channels could be offered in that core group.


Not sure I understand you here ...

But as I said, the current active CONUS HD channels were at 265 at last report. And even at MPEG-4 the max. capacity of HD channels at 101W is around 150.

So a new HD core group is going to be somewhere north of 100 channels smaller than the total. Plus flexibility to what DIRECTV may place in the core may be limited by contractual issues with distributors who own multiple HD channels carried by DIRECTV on Ka, and want them all mirrored on Ku 101W too as they had with the former SD mirrors.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I'm fully suggesting the latter... have a core set of channels on 101 in Hi Definition... create a rv package, be done with it. Heck, I'd even suggest they make 2 of each premiums available on 101 so that people could get a reduced rate premium package with a rv package...


The problem with a limited selection of HD channels on 101 is RV customers with Ku only dishes will lose access to some channels they have today. I think most of them would rather get all the channels they want, even if they are SD, than get most of the channels they want in HD but not be able to get some of them at all.

Unless you are suggesting a base package like Select has its HD channels on 101 (with no duplicates necessary as you say) and 101 also carries MPEG4 SD duplicates of all the remaining HD channels that are on 99/103? There might be room for that - anyone know how many full time HD channels there are in Select?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> But as I said, the current active CONUS HD channels were at 265 at last report. And even at MPEG-4 the max. capacity of HD channels at 101W is around 150.
> 
> So a new HD core group is going to be somewhere north of 100 channels smaller than the total. Plus flexibility to what DIRECTV may place in the core may be limited by contractual issues with distributors who own multiple HD channels carried by DIRECTV on Ka, and want them all mirrored on Ku 101W too as they had with the former SD mirrors.


Is that capacity of 150 without any SD at 101? If not, the core would be smaller to allow for every channel not carried in HD on 101 to be carried in SD on 101.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> And even at MPEG-4 the max. capacity of HD channels at 101W is around 150.


The concept of "max capacity" is pretty flexible once they switch to DVB-S2, but we have no idea what their plans are for modulation on Ku once they drop MPEG2 SD. We can be sure they will convert most (but can't convert all due to network tuner limitations) transponders from DSS to DVB-S2 - since they've already done that on the 119 transponder that has carried a few MPEG4 HD channels for several years.

They have the modulation cranked up to the max on Ku, but that max for DSS is only QPSK 6/7, good for about 1.71 bits/Hz. On Ka CONUS beams they use QPSK 2/3, good for about 1.33 bits/Hz. If they stick with QPSK 2/3 on 101, they will only have room for 3 or 4 MPEG4 HD channels per transponder, not very much but that's more than enough if they plan to eliminate all SD duplication. If they used a modulation similar to what they did with DSS (DVB-S2 doesn't have 6/7, it has 5/6 and 7/8 though) they can get 5 MPEG4 HD channels per transponder.

But they don't have to stop there. They can go higher, and trade rain fade margin for more bits/Hz. They could trade 4-5 db of signal margin and still guarantee that Ku would never fade before Ka, which would allow using 8PSK 9/10 and provide double the bit rate of QPSK 2/3. That would allow 8 MPEG4 HD channels per transponder. I don't think they'd ever go that far, but if they use any scheme involving SD duplication there's no way they'll stick with QPSK 2/3 on 101.

Another possibility is that T16 launches to 101, and uses 24 36 MHz wide transponders from 101 - SkyMex-2 had 36 MHz wide transponders so it wouldn't be the first time they did that. That's more bandwidth efficient (720 MHz usable bandwidth excluding guard bands and roll off, vs 640 MHz using 32 24 MHz wide transponders) so they'd get 12.5% more MPEG4 HD channels on 101. If they really wanted to squeeze it extra hard with the new satellite, they could reduce the roll off from 20% to 5% like Dish did on their "turbo" transponders (good for ~820 MHz excluding guard bands and roll off)


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

HoTat2 said:


> Not sure I understand you here ...
> 
> But as I said, the current active CONUS HD channels were at 265 at last report. And even at MPEG-4 the max. capacity of HD channels at 101W is around 150.
> 
> ...


As it is now, many rvers and those with a phase III dish see sd from 101 only. If those channels become hd, the same channels will be available to them as before, just in hd.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

studechip said:


> As it is now, many rvers and those with a phase III dish see sd from 101 only. If those channels become hd, the same channels will be available to them as before, just in hd.


Again, as has been mentioned before, there's not enough bandwidth for that. As of last month, 101 currently has about 304 national SD channels. Even if you account for channels that will be MPEG4/SD for various reasons, they simply cannot fit all of those remaining channels in HD on 101. Even if the future 101 satellite is all conus with no spotbeams, it will only provide room for anywhere from 160-192 HD channels.

For all we know, they might just flat out refuse to allow 101 only setups, especially if contractual issues (and technical issues like Puerto Rico mirroring requirements) prevent them from playing favorites or throwing all the Select or Entertainment channels to 101. Heck they might be including RV users in their plans for the equipment swaps like they will for residential and commercial subscribers, so they have nothing to worry about. (Unless they're an unoffical RV'er who just uses one of their in home receivers without notifying DirecTV)


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

studechip said:


> As it is now, many rvers and those with a phase III dish see sd from 101 only. If those channels become hd, the same channels will be available to them as before, just in hd.


But you can't replace all the some 250+ SD channels at Ku 101W which have HD versions on the Ka band with HD versions as they won't all fit in the 32 narrower 24 MHz wide tps. there.

Even at MPEG-4 the HD versions typically require over twice as much bandwidth as their MPEG-2 SD ones.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

I didn't know there were that many sd channels on 101. Forget all I said!


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

James Long said:


> That is a big if. Lets put it this way ... all channels on 101 must remain on 101 in some format. Failure to maintain channels on 101 will lead to lost customers and lost revenue.
> 
> Once all the MPEG2 SD is converted to MPEG4 there will be some space available for additional channels but any attempt to create a "core HD" package on 101 would be very limited. MPEG4 does not provide infinite bandwidth.
> 
> What you are not seeing or ignoring is how DIRECTV makes such a switch appear instant. A lot occurs before that keystoke makes the channel change occur in an instant on your receiver.


After the changeover the only customers that are in question will be some RVers. That's it. Everyone else will have a 99,101,103 dish and mpeg4 equipment without question. I can't believe there will be that many rvers they can't also upgrade... and would lose as customers...

And I wouldn't call over 100 Hi Definition channels to little choice...that's not very limited.

I'm not ignoring the prep work for flipping stuff from one day to another. I never said do all channels in one moment. But they can do five to 10 channels at once. And they do that all the time anyway so this is just a non issue. Prep as long as you have to and then one day execute in a minute. Done.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> The concept of "max capacity" is pretty flexible once they switch to DVB-S2, but we have no idea what their plans are for modulation on Ku once they drop MPEG2 SD. We can be sure they will convert most (but can't convert all due to network tuner limitations) transponders from DSS to DVB-S2 - since they've already done that on the 119 transponder that has carried a few MPEG4 HD channels for several years.
> 
> They have the modulation cranked up to the max on Ku, but that max for DSS is only QPSK 6/7, good for about 1.71 bits/Hz. On Ka CONUS beams they use QPSK 2/3, good for about 1.33 bits/Hz. If they stick with QPSK 2/3 on 101, they will only have room for 3 or 4 MPEG4 HD channels per transponder, not very much but that's more than enough if they plan to eliminate all SD duplication. If they used a modulation similar to what they did with DSS (DVB-S2 doesn't have 6/7, it has 5/6 and 7/8 though) they can get 5 MPEG4 HD channels per transponder.
> 
> ...


Wish we could see some info on t16....

I have to wonder if t16 will replace all the satelites at 101 for the changeover. Kill three transponders on an old sat and fire up a couple on t16. Then just slowly one transponder at a time flip the channels.

I'll be very curios if they include any spots on that sat as well...


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> Prep as long as you have to and then one day execute in a minute


Yep, actual channel swaps happen instantly. As long as the transponder on 101 is cleared and all prep work is done involving changing the modulation, the actual last step of a channel moving from 99 or 103 can happen instantly. i.e. two weeks ago HGTV and Cooking Channel swapped transponder slots with Discovery and Animal Planet, there was no need to have any test or temporary feed before the move. One moment HGTV was coming from TPN 16/VPID 1070 and Discovery was coming from TPN 18/VPID 1010, the next moment Discovery was coming from TPN 16/VPID 1070 and HGTV was coming from TPN 18/VPID 1010.

There's also no reason why they can't pull the plug on every MPEG2 channel all at once. The one thing they will need to do first though is put up MPEG4/SD versions of the remaining SD only channels on either 99 or 103 (along with MPEG4 versions of the Music Choice channels). Heck for the subscribers that ignored all previous attempts to contact them, or refused to provide up to date contact information, that will be the only way to definitely get their attention. Yeah you can do it in phases, but if they only watch a few channels, they won't notice until their channel is pulled. (i.e. viewers who primarily watch channels like EWTN, TBN and Daystar) So in the end it might be better to treat it like ripping off a band-aid for the customers they couldn't contact via other means.

i.e. after the MPG guide stream was shutdown, any remaining MPG receivers were deactivated from accounts, while anyone who didn't have an APG receiver on their account had their account suspended until they called DirecTV to finally get their equipment swapped out. They didn't do any of that though until the customers they could reach had their equipment swapped, and they exhausted all possible efforts to reach the remaining customers.


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> After the changeover the only customers that are in question will be some RVers. That's it. Everyone else will have a 99,101,103 dish and mpeg4 equipment without question. I can't believe there will be that many rvers they can't also upgrade... and would lose as customers...


You might be surprised how many DirecTV RV'ers use the domed carryout dishes that can only access 101 ku/mpeg2 signals and already had DirecTV in their homes which made the carry outs an affordable option by simply using a receiver from their house as necessary. I would also wager that VERY few, if any of these domed carryout users maintain a separate RV account nor do they call DirecTV to change their service addresses when they move around to access locals like many Slimline tripod and Travl'er owners do that can access all 3 locations, basically makes them "ghost" users to DirecTV.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> Wish we could see some info on t16....
> 
> I have to wonder if t16 will replace all the satelites at 101 for the changeover. Kill three transponders on an old sat and fire up a couple on t16. Then just slowly one transponder at a time flip the channels.
> 
> I'll be very curios if they include any spots on that sat as well...


If they plan to carry any remotely popular HD channels on 101, they MUST replace all three satellites at 101 with a single new one (either T16 goes to 101 or it goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101) because they'd need to have it mirror those HD channels to PR.

If 101 ends up with MPEG4 SD versions of every channel Directv has then they could stick with the current satellites at 101 but they'd be unable to use five transponders that can't be covered via CONUS using D8 & D9S. A new satellite would include a beam to Hawaii, which would also be nice, as they could start using Slimlines for installs there instead of the big ugly AK/HI dish. I have to think people paying millions for a house in such beautiful surroundings would prefer their dish be as unobtrusive as possible!

I could see perhaps including a handful of spot beams on T16 if they have a few holes in coverage they need to fill, or a market where they need a little extra capacity. It seems like they've abandoned the idea of serving all DMAs, given that they have spot beams on D14 dedicated to unserved DMAs that are still inactive, so I wouldn't look for any beams for them.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

What satellite(s) does one need for DIRECTV's "AIRBORNE OFFICE CHOICE" package? It is advertised as "145+ channels" for $98.99 ($47.99 for each additional receiver) with the option to add on NFL Sunday Ticket, Extra Innings, Center Ice, NBA League Pass, and other sports packages and premium channels.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

Any idea if there is an updated map file showing the updates to the OTA channel reassignments that occurred in the past year? I am looking at my local market (Harrisburg, PA) and it still shows old OTA info for WGCB and WPMT.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

will Gary Toma's tables helpful for you ?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> What satellite(s) does one need for DIRECTV's "AIRBORNE OFFICE CHOICE" package? It is advertised as "145+ channels" for $98.99 ($47.99 for each additional receiver) with the option to add on NFL Sunday Ticket, Extra Innings, Center Ice, NBA League Pass, and other sports packages and premium channels.


I googled this, it is targeted at private jets - $1500/yr for the first access card and $500/yr for each additional access card (and people thought $7/month was bad )

Probably uses a similar auto tracking KaKu dish like boats that cost $10K or whatever...but if you can afford a private jet that's chicken feed!


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> I googled this, it is targeted at private jets - $1500/yr for the first access card and $500/yr for each additional access card (and people thought $7/month was bad )
> 
> Probably uses a similar auto tracking KaKu dish like boats that cost $10K or whatever...but if you can afford a private jet that's chicken feed!


and what does air force one pay?


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

JoeTheDragon said:


> and what does air force one pay?


$0.00


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

I've gotten 2 letters from DirecTV so far about this equipment changeout. The first letter a couple of months ago said I needed to change out equipment or I would lose my local channels (zip code 31788), and the second letter (received a few days ago) just said: "Starting on 04/02/19, you will no longer be able to view your DirecTV programming with some of my current equipment".

Let me start with the fact that I have already been contacted quite a while back (probably over a year ago) and told I needed to have my main receiver swapped out for the MP4 conversion. This was done and I am using the MP4 receiver they sent me with my SD television receiver.

This is what I have currently:
1) recently replaced MP4 receiver as my main receiver
2) Old Philips DVR - MP2 only (owned)
3) Old DirecTV DVR - MP2 only (owned)
4) Old Round dual LNB dish (can't see any other satellites due to trees)
5) My own off air television antennas (mixed into one of the LNB feeds)

My current package (Select) offers local stations, but I can't see the required satellite. I am OK with this, since with my off air antennas I get better quality and many more stations than offered by DirecTV for my location.

I don't care about having my DVR's replaced, as I am thinking about turning them off anyway since the TV they feed is busted.

My installation is a pole mount (8x8 inch timber mounted in concrete out in the only spot where I get a satellite view), with the 2 cables buried underground back to the house, with all the rest of the wiring under the house. So basically this is a custom installation.

All I want to do is continue with my normal SD channels in the Select package (without locals due to LOS). I already have the MP4 capable receiver, so they won't need to swap that. If they convert 101 to MP4 and keep SD on that satellite, will this mess up my off air signal sharing of one of the LNB cables with my off air antenna signals?

(And before someone suggests moving my viewing to the internet, I live in a rural area and the fastest (and only) internet I can get is 16Mb DSL from my phone company (Windstream)

And, if it makes any difference, this account is one of the original accounts, with an account number in the low 600,000's. Been a customer for many, many years.

Thanks!


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

a) if you have LOS to 101W (MPEG-2), then most likely you can install KaKu dish what will cover three main sats 99/101/103 (not sure if your LiL channels covering - check Gary Toma's Transponder Map tables)
b) instead of "MP2 or MP4" (actually it should be MPEG-2 or -4 types) please post your STB models, like H20-700 or HR23-400, etc for our future assessment of your setup
c) timber is not recommended material - it's slightly bending during rainy and hot sunny days and your dish can lost sat signal completely , you should replace it to metal pipe post


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

P Smith said:


> a) if you have LOS to 101W (MPEG-2), then most likely you can install KaKu dish what will cover three main sats 99/101/103 (not sure if your LiL channels covering - check Gary Toma's Transponder Map tables)
> b) instead of "MP2 or MP4" (actually it should be MPEG-2 or -4 types) please post your STB models, like H20-700 or HR23-400, etc for our future assessment of your setup
> c) timber is not recommended material - it's slightly bending during rainy and hot sunny days and your dish can lost sat signal completely , you should replace it to metal pipe post


Looks like I have 6 locals, 5 on 99W and 1 on 103W. (Albany, GA market)

My main receiver is an H24-700. My two DVR's, which are going away, are a Philips DSR600R and a DirecTV R10. They are obviously end of life.

There's nothing wrong with my timber pole. It's pressure treated, set in concrete, and 8x8 inches square. It is not bent, nor twisted, nor rotten, nor have I ever had a dish alignment issue, even during last season's hurricane that passed over us. It has a metal cap to prevent rain water getting in and soaking it through the end. The timber pole is a non-issue.

I'm mostly concerned about being disabled and not knowing what I'll have to do about this situation. I don't have a standard install, DirecTV is not going to rewire my antennas, and I can't afford to pay anyone to do it for me.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mrdbdigital said:


> I'm mostly concerned about being disabled and not knowing what I'll have to do about this situation. I don't have a standard install, DirecTV is not going to rewire my antennas, and I can't afford to pay anyone to do it for me.


I don't think Directv will care about the wiring under the house, or from the pole to the house. So long as it is good quality RG6 they'll leave it alone other than maybe replacing the connectors on the end. The wooden pole is non-standard, but they may not have a problem with that - can't hurt to ask especially since it is changes they are making which are requiring you to make changes.

I would recommend you call Directv and reference the letter you received and ask them:

1) will they replace your dish with a Slimline for free as part of this. Don't tell them about the pole, hopefully when the tech arrives he'll be willing to either replace the dish using your existing pole, or replace that pole with one that confirms to Directv's standards without charging you.

2) if you don't replace the dish, will you be able to receive all the channels in the Select package with your current dish (I assume it is the 18" round that receives 101 only) other than your locals.

The answer to the second question is something a lot of us have been wondering about, so if they give you an answer please let us know what they say. Basically there are two routes Directv can go, and depending on what they do the 18" round dish will still be able to pick up all channels in SD (except for locals, which luckily you don't care about) or the 18" round dish will become essentially useless and everyone will need a Slimline dish starting April 2, 2019.


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

slice1900 said:


> I don't think Directv will care about the wiring under the house, or from the pole to the house. So long as it is good quality RG6 they'll leave it alone other than maybe replacing the connectors on the end. The wooden pole is non-standard, but they may not have a problem with that - can't hurt to ask especially since it is changes they are making which are requiring you to make changes.


I am diplexing my outdoor antennas into one of the LNB lines to get the signal into the house, where I split it back out to go to my television. That works fine within the spectrum of the signals from the old, dual LNB's, but it won't work if they have to swap me out to a new SWM dish.

That brings up another question. Can I continue to diplex my antennas if I used a 4 output triple LNB dish instead of going to SWM? I only have two cables, so 2 outputs would go unused.

They're gonna balk at the coax. It's not RG-6, but it's not crappy RG-59 either. I'm using Belden 1505A, which is a RG-59 style low loss cable that does have a solid copper 18ga. center conductor. Quality stuff used forever in the broadcast industry. (I'm a retired broadcast engineer).

I may just have them give me one new run of RG-6 (with some extra length to be buried later by a friend) and go with an SWM dish. I have a box of the "good RG-6" that they can use if they don't want to leave any extra. It can just lay in the grass until I can get my friend to come over and bury it, or perhaps I can run it overhead the 30 feet to reach the house temporarily.

I'll try and give them a call in the next few days and let everyone here know what they tell me.

Thanks for the input!


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Yes, the essential problem is that all we know for certain is that the old MPEG-2 based "DSS" transmission format, which has been used by DIRECTV from its inception back in '93, is going away by April 2/19.

Post this, what DIRECTV actually intends to do with their Ku DBS frequency band and satellite positions they formally used to transmit the DSS format signals is not known for sure.

While there have been some very good speculations as to what may likely happen.

Nothing is known for certain.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> "DSS" transmission format,


I'm very doubt the part will change... MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 is much easy task (a matter of silicon implementation), but eliminating DSS and whole SI/CA environment melted into ... nay, not happen in foreseeable future !


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

First of all, you mention that you have a couple DVRs but you probably won't get them replaced. I'd encourage you to get them replaced anyway. You will get them free as part of this upgrade so why not? You can always call a few days later and remove them from your account if you don't want to keep paying the $7/month to continue service for each. Pretty sure they will not ask for them back, and they might even be considered 'owned' since they were replacing owned DVRs which would give them some resale on value on eBay should you decide you will never reconnect them. Either way, having DVRs available that you can connect and restart service on at any time would be good if you ever fix/replace that broken TV since you'd have to pay Directv to get DVRs later (or upgrade and take on a new 24 month commitment)

Diplexing your antenna shouldn't be a problem. The SWM dish uses only one coax so you could dedicate the other coax to your antenna. If you have only one coax run to each TV with a diplexer at each so it must share with satellite it is still possible to diplex - though it will NOT be supported by Directv (disconnect the diplexers before the installer arrives and don't mention it to him!)

DECA networking isn't necessary, the only equipment that _requires_ networking at all is a Genie client, which needs it to receive video from the Genie. For everything else it provides optional features you can choose to live without - whole home networking allows DVRs to be accessed from other receivers/DVRs, and internet access allows the receiver/DVR to access on demand programming and a few other minor things.

He will probably install a DECA/CCK connected to one leg of the SWM splitter with the other leg(s) to your receivers/DVRs, which will have the ethernet output connected to your home network / router. After he leaves you can disconnect this, and put your diplexers back in place and you'll have two choices:

1) leave things like that, and everything will work fine subject the limitations above since you wouldn't have any networking with your receivers

2) connect your receivers/DVRs to your home network / router with ethernet - this isn't 'supported' by Directv but works just fine

Not sure how the installer would react to the Belden 1505A cable. Hopefully if you pull the "I'm a former broadcast engineer, I know what I'm doing and this is equivalent to RG6 and meets Directv's specs" card he'll just shrug and trust you. Depends on whether the guy who shows up is a stickler for Directv's rules or is happy to get to the next job more quickly.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> I'm very doubt the part will change... MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 is much easy task (a matter of silicon implementation), but eliminating DSS and whole SI/CA environment melted into ... nay, not happen in foreseeable future !


They will have to keep some DSS transponders since there are some HD receivers/DVRs that have a DSS/DVB-S only network tuner (the H24-100 for example)

It will be interesting to see if they use MPEG4 on those DSS transponders or if the programs they carry remain MPEG2. While there's nothing that makes carrying MPEG4 on a DSS transponder impossible, it wasn't defined with that in mind so I wouldn't be shocked if a handful of MPEG2 based channels remain (they wouldn't be so bit starved so the quality should improve)

I suppose they could put all the various data PIDs for guide data etc. that the network tuner needs to access on one DSS transponder which carries no audio/video, and the other 31 transponders get converted to DVB-S2D.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> I suppose they could put all the various data PIDs for guide data etc. that the network tuner needs to access on one DSS transponder which carries no audio/video


Oh-oh ! If you would know how SI/CA carried by many PIDs does spread over _many_ tpns; I wouldn't guess DTV reasons for that, but for sure IMO to minimize cross impact between APG data and channels


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> I'm very doubt the part will change... MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 is much easy task (a matter of silicon implementation), but eliminating DSS and whole SI/CA environment melted into ... nay, not happen in foreseeable future !


So you're saying there will be an MPEG-4 based DSS format after the MPEG-2 shutdown?

That is, they won't be using DVB-S2 (or "A3" format) for whatever MPEG-4 HD or SD channels (depending on what type of channels DIRECTV chooses) placed on the Ku DBS band?

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

Just spent about a half hour on the phone with DirecTV, and because of my questions, ended up with an "answer" from Tier 2 Tech support.

They told me that all SD programming will remain on 101W, and that I could continue to use my existing round 2 LNB satellite dish as long as I didn't want or care about local channels or HD. However, my 24-700 receiver I got a couple of years or so ago would have to be swapped out for a new receiver, even though it is capable of MPEG4 and HD. ( I got the 24-700 about the time that NASA-TV moved to being an HD only channel).

So, I guess that answers most of my questions. I hope they are correct. Their offer to me as an existing customer is to replace my existing 2 DVR's with a new DVR and a couple Genies, or swap out my main receiver for a new model if I discontinue DVR service. Either way, no new charges, fees, or new contract requirement

I told them I'd get back to them.

Anyone have any information about this "new receiver" or its' model number?


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

mrdbdigital said:


> Just spent about a half hour on the phone with DirecTV, and because of my questions, ended up with an "answer" from Tier 2 Tech support.
> 
> They told me that all SD programming will remain on 101W, and that I could continue to use my existing round 2 LNB satellite dish as long as I didn't want or care about local channels or HD. However, my 24-700 receiver I got a couple of years or so ago would have to be swapped out for a new receiver, even though it is capable of MPEG4 and HD. ( I got the 24-700 about the time that NASA-TV moved to being an HD only channel).
> 
> ...


This one that will do both DTV over SatelliteTV and the full DTV over the internet that will launch this Fall.

ATTC71KW Wireless STB User Manual Wistron NeWeb Corporation


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

mrdbdigital said:


> Just spent about a half hour on the phone with DirecTV, and because of my questions, ended up with an "answer" from Tier 2 Tech support.
> 
> They told me that all SD programming will remain on 101W, and that I could continue to use my existing round 2 LNB satellite dish as long as I didn't want or care about local channels or HD. However, my 24-700 receiver I got a couple of years or so ago would have to be swapped out for a new receiver, even though it is capable of MPEG4 and HD. ( I got the 24-700 about the time that NASA-TV moved to being an HD only channel).
> 
> ...


Question ...

Trying to get some insight from this to determine what exactly is going to happen with the Ku DBS band ....

Did they ever say the MPEG-2 only DVRs must go?

As the evidence from this seems to point towards discontinuing the MPEG-2 format and the Ku SD spotbeams for only MPEG-4 SD nationals.

Although why the H24 receiver must go in this situation is confusing. And I think you meant they offered an HD-DVR, a Genie and a Mini.

As to what "new model" receiver they could be referring to besides maybe an H25, I have no idea.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mrdbdigital said:


> Just spent about a half hour on the phone with DirecTV, and because of my questions, ended up with an "answer" from Tier 2 Tech support.
> 
> They told me that all SD programming will remain on 101W, and that I could continue to use my existing round 2 LNB satellite dish as long as I didn't want or care about local channels or HD. However, my 24-700 receiver I got a couple of years or so ago would have to be swapped out for a new receiver, even though it is capable of MPEG4 and HD. ( I got the 24-700 about the time that NASA-TV moved to being an HD only channel).
> 
> ...


You might want to try calling them again, I think you have fallen victim to the Directv CSR's famous "random answer generator". There's no way the H24-700 needs to be swapped out, clearly whoever you talked to was confused. If that was the case they would be sending out a LOT more letters!

It sounds like they are trying to sell you on replacing everything with a Genie and a couple of Genie clients. Who knows, maybe the CSRs have some incentives around getting people to upgrade to Genies. I know you probably don't want to after a half hour on the phone, but I think you may need to call again...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> This one that will do both DTV over SatelliteTV and the full DTV over the internet that will launch this Fall.
> 
> ATTC71KW Wireless STB User Manual Wistron NeWeb Corporation


That's not a receiver, and isn't what they are talking about.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> Oh-oh ! If you would know how SI/CA carried by many PIDs does spread over _many_ tpns; I wouldn't guess DTV reasons for that, but for sure IMO to minimize cross impact between APG data and channels


I know they are currently carried over many tpns, but there's no reason they HAVE to do that. I see no reason why they couldn't put everything on one tpn (assuming the total bandwidth is less than ~ 34 Mbps) if they chose to do so.

Whatever reasons they have for spreading it out now may not apply after they drop MPEG2 and don't have the bandwidth limitations on 101 they have today, or those reasons might be overridden by the benefits of being able to use DVB-S2 on as many tpns as possible (because, among other things, it allows a far larger variety of modulation/error correction combinations)


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> That's not a receiver, and isn't what they are talking about.


exactly ! I don't get the CragerM pitch ...


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> I know they are currently carried over many tpns, but there's no reason they HAVE to do that. I see no reason *why they couldn't put everything on one tpn* (assuming the total bandwidth is less than ~ 34 Mbps) if they chose to do so.
> 
> Whatever reasons they have for spreading it out now may not apply after they drop MPEG2 and don't have the bandwidth limitations on 101 they have today, or those reasons might be overridden by the benefits of being able to use DVB-S2 on as many tpns as possible (because, among other things, it allows a far larger variety of modulation/error correction combinations)


and we must add to that count many FW spooling tpns...

my vision of DSS at 101W Ku tpn as a DTV core what would be hard to change dramatically, like switch to A3 type, perhaps they will keep 1/2 of the [CONUS tpns] sat bandwidth with DSS [legacy] signals for long time


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

P Smith said:


> exactly ! I don't get the CragerM pitch ...


Sorry tried to help. How can it not be a receiver when it will work with the HS-27 and the future HS-37?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> Sorry tried to help. How can it not be a receiver when it will work with the HS-27 and the future HS-37?


Because it is a client, not a receiver - and it isn't even released yet and probably won't be until around the end of the year.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> and we must add to that count many FW spooling tpns...
> 
> my vision of DSS at 101W Ku tpn as a DTV core what would be hard to change dramatically, like switch to A3 type, perhaps they will keep 1/2 of the [CONUS tpns] sat bandwidth with DSS [legacy] signals for long time


Thanks to Tom Speer we have confirmation that SWM's guide channel is always locked to the same transponder on 101 which carries PIDs for everything a receiver might need in normal operation such as all the guide data. I don't recall if he said which transponder it is, but I assume it is transponder 8 because that one has only 3 channels on it, versus 10-15 channels on the rest.

The only PIDs delivered on other transponders would have to take over the receiver's main tuner to be accessed. The only things I can think of which can do so are the initial data a receiver downloads when it starts, and firmware. I don't know why firmware is spread across four transponders, but it is definitely not because it needs a lot of bandwidth, as those four transponders appear to have about the same number of channels as the rest.

There are a slow PIDs on every transponder on 101 delivering guide data for channels on 101, because that's required by older receivers that don't have a dedicated network tuner. Those will go away after the MPEG2 SD shutdown, so what remains will be one for the guide channel and either one or four for firmware (since bandwidth isn't an issue they could easily spool all the firmware off one transponders if they had a reason to make that change)

I'd say there's very little chance half the transponders will remain DSS. It could be as few as one or two, but I'd be surprised if there were more than five.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> Because it is a client, not a receiver - and it isn't even released yet and probably won't be until around the end of the year.


Sorry I forgot clients aren't receivers, duh.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> I assume it is transponder 8 because that one has only 3 channels on it,


Transponder 8 is home of most of the SD part time feeds, like sports alternates, it actually has around 12 with video feeds that get on average a higher bitrate than other SD feeds. You only see 3 in the maps because the data is grabbed at 6 in the morning when RSN alternates are rarely live, but we have confirmed that those VPID and APIDs are active 24/7 via TSReader where we can see every PID on the DSS transponders and their bitrates in realtime, they just don't point to any channel until 30 minutes before they go into use.

Unlike HD Sports where they reuse HD Cinema channels, the SD sports alternates use reserved space scattered across multiple transponders, and occasionally the infomercial channels if they need more.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

KyL416 said:


> Transponder 8 is home of most of the SD part time feeds, like sports alternates, it actually has around 12 with video feeds that get on average a higher bitrate than other SD feeds. You only see 3 in the maps because the data is grabbed at 6 in the morning when RSN alternates are rarely live, but we have confirmed that those VPID and APIDs are active 24/7 via TSReader where we can see every PID on the DSS transponders and their bitrates in realtime, they just don't point to any channel until 30 minutes before they go into use.
> 
> Unlike HD Sports where they reuse HD Cinema channels, the SD sports alternates use reserved space scattered across multiple transponders, and occasionally the infomercial channels if they need more.


Hmmm, if the SWM guide channel isn't tpn 8, I guess everything it carries doesn't consume enough bandwidth to really to make a big difference in the number of channels carried on it (at least not as far as the 'snapshot' view we get in the spreadsheet)


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> Hmmm, if the SWM guide channel isn't tpn 8, I guess everything it carries doesn't consume enough bandwidth to really to make a big difference in the number of channels carried on it (at least not as far as the 'snapshot' view we get in the spreadsheet)


Tom discovered the SWM guide channel uses the "slow PID" stream from tp. 32 at 101W.

A refresher ...

From Tom Speer posted back on 1/22/18 on Edgecutter.



> To clarify what I have found: The fast APG pids are on specific Net 0 TPNs, as I described before, they are both even and odd. We use these for capturing the data that we post here in the Resources Forum, because we can record each TPN for 28 seconds, and be assured of getting three complete copies, to assure that no data gets lost. To record all the Fast APG pids in binary form takes about 12 minutes, because we have to tune to all those transponders, and can only record 16 pids on a transponder at a time. The receivers can probably do it faster, by using checksums to validate, instead of multiple copies. And they only need a small subset of the Fast pids.
> 
> There are a set of 34 slow pids, each running about 16 kbps, on EVERY transponder on 101 and 119, that I have looked at. I haven't checked every transponder. These 34 pids contain guide data, for all the US satellites except network 724 (Market 213, Puerto Rico). It takes a little less than 6 minutes for all channels to appear in those records. My theory is that they are on every transponder to support installations with no SWM switch. *The guide channel on the SWM is the full TPN data stream from TPN 32. It contains the slow pids plus additional pids with some guide data and a lot more content, probably related to advanced features not supported on the legacy receivers.*
> 
> My assumption is that the fast pids are specifically tuned to populate the guide after a reset. The receiver doesn't have to tune to all of them, just the national ones and their local market data. The pids on the guide channel, then provide more information to flesh it out over time.


Transponder Maps: Domestic, Mexico, Latin ~ Data 5/24/2018 - Page 43

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> but I assume it is transponder 8


I recall it's tpn32


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

HoTat2 said:


> Question ...
> 
> Trying to get some insight from this to determine what exactly is going to happen with the Ku DBS band ....
> 
> ...


Yes, they said the old MPEG-2 DVR's must go. They are such old models that they will not re-active them if I turn them off now, so I don't plan to keep them. They offered me one HD-DVR with 2 remote boxes that feed off that for my 2 bedrooms.

If that new receiver will only do SWM, I guess that answers my question about changing my dish.


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

slice1900 said:


> You might want to try calling them again, I think you have fallen victim to the Directv CSR's famous "random answer generator". There's no way the H24-700 needs to be swapped out, clearly whoever you talked to was confused. If that was the case they would be sending out a LOT more letters!
> 
> It sounds like they are trying to sell you on replacing everything with a Genie and a couple of Genie clients. Who knows, maybe the CSRs have some incentives around getting people to upgrade to Genies. I know you probably don't want to after a half hour on the phone, but I think you may need to call again...


They were kind of "pushing" on the DVR situation. They definitely said what I have was "end of life" at this conversion.

They last one I talked to was Tier 2 Tech support. She's the one who said I could keep the dish, but my receiver had to be replaced. If they mean with an H25 (She wouldn't or couldn't confirm the model number of the replacement), then the dish will have to be changed, since, IIRC, the H25 only does SWM?

I am rapidly approaching the point where I just don't give a d**m anymore. I think I'm just gonna let things ride and see what is happening later this fall. After all, this is almost a year away.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

mrdbdigital said:


> then the dish will have to be changed, since, IIRC, the H25 only does SWM?


correct


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

mrdbdigital said:


> They offered me one HD-DVR with 2 remote boxes that feed off that for my 2 bedrooms.


it could be one of two variants:

HR54 & 2x C41
HS17 & 2x C41
if you have one UHD TV, then one mini will be C61, if you have 2 UHD TVs then second choice and two C61


----------



## techguy88 (Mar 19, 2015)

The HD-DVR that's offered as part of the SD to HD upgrade is the Genie (HR44 or HR54) not the Genie 2 (HS17) with wired Genie Minis. Its possible for some accounts to be eligible for the SD to HD upgrade offer and the Genie 2 upgrade offer. All Genie 2 upgrade offers are standard offers which require a 24 month agreement and chargeable ARS fees with no discounts.

According to my friend that works at a D* call center the HD receivers (like the H24 & H25) do not need replaced.

All SD equipment on the account has to be replaced otherwise the discounts off of the Advance Receiver Services will stop if there is active SD equipment on the account. Agents are not allowed to continue on with the order unless they mark every SD unit as "replace" with either the Genie or Genie Mini.

If you don't have a SWIM compatible dish then it will need to be replaced. He said even if a CSR gives misinformation and says "No a dish upgrade isn't required" that doesn't matter as the system will automatically add a SWIM Dish upgrade to the WO if your account has never had a SWIM dish installed or if you have no SWIM compatible receivers active on your account.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

techguy88 said:


> Agents are not allowed to continue on with the order unless they mark every SD unit as "replace" with either the Genie or Genie Mini.


This might be a gotcha for some people if they have some equipment on their account they don't intend to replace as Directv's system will need to have everything marked for upgrade - you'd need to have them discontinue service on the things you don't want to upgrade (i.e. if you are going to have fewer TVs with Directv service in the future) and THEN call them back later after that's done with the upgrade that will be processed with all your equipment.

For mrdbdigital, that implies that if he wants to continue without the DVRs and just the single receiver, he should have them disconnect those SD DVRs first, and then call them for the dish upgrade. And hopefully get someone who is a little more clueful and doesn't tell him the H24 needs to be replaced.


----------



## mrdbdigital (Oct 3, 2004)

slice1900 said:


> For mrdbdigital, that implies that if he wants to continue without the DVRs and just the single receiver, he should have them disconnect those SD DVRs first, and then call them for the dish upgrade. And hopefully get someone who is a little more clueful and doesn't tell him the H24 needs to be replaced.


Both of my DVR's will be history before I call for the upgrade, so that issue will go away. All I'll have then with be the H24 receiver connected to a SD television. Since I only care about the 101 satellite, and don't care about my locals on 99 and 103, I only need to see 101. The H24 I have already works fine without my having a SWIM dish, so unless there is some technical issue (change) in the signal that requires SWIM, I don't see why I need a SWIM dish? Tier 2 support told me they were not obsoleting the original round dishes for SD only customers.

The more I think back on these phone conversations, I think the entire topic was being confused by me having the DVR's, which are definitely EOL. Since I will soon be removing them from my account (I dread that argument with CS) perhaps my problems will go away.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

mrdbdigital said:


> Both of my DVR's will be history before I call for the upgrade, so that issue will go away. All I'll have then with be the H24 receiver connected to a SD television. Since I only care about the 101 satellite, and don't care about my locals on 99 and 103, I only need to see 101. The H24 I have already works fine without my having a SWIM dish, so unless there is some technical issue (change) in the signal that requires SWIM, I don't see why I need a SWIM dish? Tier 2 support told me they were not obsoleting the original round dishes for SD only customers.
> 
> The more I think back on these phone conversations, I think the entire topic was being confused by me having the DVR's, which are definitely EOL. Since I will soon be removing them from my account (I dread that argument with CS) perhaps my problems will go away.


Well ...

With the exception of the nonsensical claim that the H24 receiver has to go. Assuming the tier 2 tech is accurate about everything else.

If the MPEG-2 DVRs must go. But the 101W round dish will still be usable after the transition. And the LiLs will only be on the Ka band.

Then I really don't see any alternative to this meaning the elimination of the Ku DBS spotbeams. And only MPEG-4 (A3) SD nationals on after the transition.

These hints from the tech still don't give a clue though as to what becomes of 110 and 119W.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

When this happens will their be more bandwidth for the local subchannels and adding more 4k?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

CraigerM said:


> When this happens will their be more bandwidth for the local subchannels and adding more 4k?


well D15 is still idling, perhaps last days it's begin serving tp1-8 ... but there wasn't any official announce from ATT/DTV - it should have plenty of bandwidth
not telling about whole RB, reverse band ...


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> When this happens will their be more bandwidth for the local subchannels and adding more 4k?


Conversion to A3 SD on the Ku DBS band will open up more bandwidth there, yes.

But not for 4K which is supposedly destined for the Reverse Band. And not for OTA diginets on subchannels, which DIRECTV will probably never carry unless they're network outlets for the big four as they've always done.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mrdbdigital said:


> Both of my DVR's will be history before I call for the upgrade, so that issue will go away. All I'll have then with be the H24 receiver connected to a SD television. Since I only care about the 101 satellite, and don't care about my locals on 99 and 103, I only need to see 101. The H24 I have already works fine without my having a SWIM dish, so unless there is some technical issue (change) in the signal that requires SWIM, I don't see why I need a SWIM dish? Tier 2 support told me they were not obsoleting the original round dishes for SD only customers.
> 
> The more I think back on these phone conversations, I think the entire topic was being confused by me having the DVR's, which are definitely EOL. Since I will soon be removing them from my account (I dread that argument with CS) perhaps my problems will go away.


Well you will definitely lose your locals, but you don't care about that since you said you have an antenna so you aren't using satellite to get them.

Its possible using a 101 only dish you might lose some of your channels on April 2, 2019 - though if they were correct that all SD programming will remain on 101 (using MPEG4) then you would be fine. I'd probably want to hear that being told to multiple people before I believe it though, given that this was the same CSR who also told your H24-700 would have to be swapped which we know isn't true.

If they offer to replace your dish with a Slimline you should do it, as you'll be able to watch in HD when that SD television conks out and you replace it with an HDTV. With only a single receiver there's no reason you can't keep diplexing your antenna - just remove the diplexers before the installer shows up and put them back after he leaves.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Solid Signal's blog just posted this article and it has some SD info it.

End of the line for satellite TV in RVs? - The Solid Signal Blog


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> Solid Signal's blog just posted this article and it has some SD info it.
> 
> End of the line for satellite TV in RVs? - The Solid Signal Blog


Nothing that we didn't know ... but concisely put (and the answer is no - satellite TV in RV will not be ending in 2019).


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Stuart did provide confirmation that Directv told dealers that 119 will be going away in 2019, so that's one mystery solved.

Now we just need to figure out if 101 will carry MPEG4 SD duplicates of all channels, or there will be no duplicates and 101 will have a lot of HD. If so they'd have a LOT of bandwidth freed up and could increase their HD PQ significantly, but it would make life hard for many RV/boat customers. Decisions, decisions...


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I looked up info on the 101 and it looks like the lifespan is 15 years and it was launched in 2007. It would expire in 2022. Why bother putting Mpeg 4 SD duplicates at the 101 if it would only be for four years? I think it would be cool going all HD and not have any SD duplicates. Like Slice1900 said you would be able to increase PQ significantly and I think add more 4k channels. However, the only thing I wont like about that is HD staying out longer in bad weather than SD.

DirecTV satellite fleet - Wikipedia


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> I looked up info on the 101 and it looks like the lifespan is 15 years and it was launched in 2007. It would expire in 2022. Why bother putting Mpeg 4 SD duplicates at the 101 if it would only be for four years? I think it would be cool going all HD and not have any SD duplicates. Like Slice1900 said you would be able to increase PQ significantly and I think add more 4k channels. However, the only thing I wont like about that is HD staying out longer in bad weather than SD.
> 
> DirecTV satellite fleet - Wikipedia


The thinking is there's to be a new satellite, possibly "T16," with a full 32 tp. Ku DBS CONUS beam payload for 101W.

Or the current T15 at 103W that already has such a payload, could be moved to 101W and provide this service, with the new T16's Ka band payload taking its place at 103W. Either of these possibilities would also be advantageous to Hawaii and Alaska subs. as both T15 and likely T16 are equipped with Ku spotbeams for HI and PR, and an improved CONUS+ which covers AK with a better signal strength than the current old crop of satellites at 101W.

So they may be able to ditch the 1.2m AK/HI albatross ODUs

Problem with these predictions is there's no real information released yet on the new T16 satellite. And I also notice that at least for Arianespance, there is no mention of T16 on its launch schedule as far as you can search into the future.

Is it to be launched from Russia or something anybody know?

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

from Dr.No's launch pad  or Sea Launch platform


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> I looked up info on the 101 and it looks like the lifespan is 15 years and it was launched in 2007. It would expire in 2022. Why bother putting Mpeg 4 SD duplicates at the 101 if it would only be for four years? I think it would be cool going all HD and not have any SD duplicates. Like Slice1900 said you would be able to increase PQ significantly and I think add more 4k channels. However, the only thing I wont like about that is HD staying out longer in bad weather than SD.
> 
> DirecTV satellite fleet - Wikipedia


Depends which satellite. D8 (serving even transponders IIRC) has fuel life until 2034, and while D9S might not last until 2034 it would probably be good until the latter half of next decade.

HoTat2 did a good job of laying out the issues with existing satellites at 101, I'd just add that because D9S was designed with spot beams, between the two they would only be able to manage 27 CONUS transponders out of 32 with the current pair. A new one (whether T16 goes directly to 101, or goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101) would indeed eliminate the need for the big dish in Hawaii, but I don't really think that would be true in Alaska. Possibly in the more populated areas like Anchorage, but no way for places like Nome. I don't think people would be nearly as concerned about unsightly dishes in Alaska as they would be in Hawaii so it probably doesn't matter. Land isn't quite so expensive up there 

HoTat2 - AFAIK you don't get scheduled for launch until your satellite is fully built/tested, though I imagine there's probably some process for "pay a lot of extra cash and move up in priority". Since it sounds like the contract was let in late 2016, it probably hasn't reached that stage. I've never believed that site that claims it will launch in August 2018, I'll bet that was just some sort of placeholder they put in. I would assume it would launch from the same place they've launched the last few, though I suppose if they're in a hurry they might need to turn to someone like SpaceX.

If they want it to be ready to go on April 2, 2019 when MPEG2 SD is shut down they probably need to launch it before the end of this year, but I don't see any reason why they should need in place immediately. They'd be fine with 27 transponders and leaving [email protected] around a little longer for PR while they're waiting.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> Depends which satellite. D8 (serving even transponders IIRC) has fuel life until 2034, and while D9S might not last until 2034 it would probably be good until the latter half of next decade.
> 
> HoTat2 did a good job of laying out the issues with existing satellites at 101, I'd just add that because D9S was designed with spot beams, between the two they would only be able to manage 27 CONUS transponders out of 32 with the current pair. A new one (whether T16 goes directly to 101, or goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101) would indeed eliminate the need for the big dish in Hawaii, but I don't really think that would be true in Alaska. Possibly in the more populated areas like Anchorage, but no way for places like Nome. I don't think people would be nearly as concerned about unsightly dishes in Alaska as they would be in Hawaii so it probably doesn't matter. Land isn't quite so expensive up there
> 
> ...


Yeah, I worried that to claim the AK/HI dish would soon no longer be necessary in Alaska might be incorrect. But thought with T15 and undoubtedly 16's higher power TWTAs for national tps., and more focused shaped CONUS+ beams which need not also stretch to cover the Hawaiian Islands like the current 101W birds.

The days of the big 1.2m dish in AK may be numbered as well.

Oh, and T8 supplies the odd numbered tps. from 101W ... 

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> Depends which satellite. D8 (serving even transponders IIRC) has fuel life until 2034, and while D9S might not last until 2034 it would probably be good until the latter half of next decade.
> 
> HoTat2 did a good job of laying out the issues with existing satellites at 101, I'd just add that because D9S was designed with spot beams, between the two they would only be able to manage 27 CONUS transponders out of 32 with the current pair. A new one (whether T16 goes directly to 101, or goes to 103 and D15 moves to 101) would indeed eliminate the need for the big dish in Hawaii, but I don't really think that would be true in Alaska. Possibly in the more populated areas like Anchorage, but no way for places like Nome. I don't think people would be nearly as concerned about unsightly dishes in Alaska as they would be in Hawaii so it probably doesn't matter. Land isn't quite so expensive up there
> 
> ...


Sorry, I forgot if you mentioned this but what if they do drop all SD how would they deal with HD staying out longer in bad weather?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> If they want it to be ready to go on April 2, 2019 when MPEG2 SD is shut down they probably need to launch it before the end of this year, but I don't see any reason why they should need in place immediately. They'd be fine with 27 transponders and leaving [email protected] around a little longer for PR while they're waiting.


MPEG4 takes less space than MPEG2 ... no new satellite would be needed to kill MPEG2 SD and continue SD service in MPEG4. If the satellite comes later in the year DIRECTV would still be able to meet an April 2 date.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> Sorry, I forgot if you mentioned this but what if they do drop all SD how would they deal with HD staying out longer in bad weather?


Considering that the default setting is to hide SD duplicates, and the average subscriber (as in the vast majority who DON'T post on forums like this) doesn't even know about Ku channels lasting longer or where to activate the show all channels option, that's probably not even a factor in their decisions.

Provided that your dish is peaked correctly, in most cases by the time you dive down into the menus to activate the show all channels option and those SD duplicates appear, the rain fade is either almost over, or it's going to continue to intensify to the point where the Ku channels go out too. And unless you're lucky enough to have it occur during a commercial break, you're going to miss a portion of your show either way so you might as well schedule a recording for a later airing or watch the episode via VOD or the station's app the following day.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

KyL416 said:


> Considering that the default setting is to hide SD duplicates, and the average subscriber (as in the vast majority who DON'T post on forums like this) doesn't even know about Ku channels lasting longer or where to activate the show all channels option, that's probably not even a factor in their decisions.
> 
> Provided that your dish is peaked correctly, in most cases by the time you dive down into the menus to activate the show all channels option and those SD duplicates appear, the rain fade is either almost over, or it's going to continue to intensify to the point where the Ku channels go out too. And unless you're lucky enough to have it occur during a commercial break, you're going to miss a portion of your show either way so you might as well schedule a recording for a later airing or watch the episode via VOD or the station's app the following day.


That's a good point. However, my signal strength is in the upper 90's and HD stays out for more than 10 mins during heavy rain. I forgot how long it stays out in light rain.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

CraigerM said:


> I looked up info on the 101 and it looks like the lifespan is 15 years and it was launched in 2007. It would expire in 2022. Why bother putting Mpeg 4 SD duplicates at the 101 if it would only be for four years? I think it would be cool going all HD and not have any SD duplicates. Like Slice1900 said you would be able to increase PQ significantly and I think add more 4k channels. However, the only thing I wont like about that is HD staying out longer in bad weather than SD.
> 
> DirecTV satellite fleet - Wikipedia


I hope they keep the duplicate SD channels because fast forwarding sports on SD is smoother than on HD.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> MPEG4 takes less space than MPEG2 ... no new satellite would be needed to kill MPEG2 SD and continue SD service in MPEG4. If the satellite comes later in the year DIRECTV would still be able to meet an April 2 date.


True, but they will also be dropping the satellites at 95W and 119W and would need to include those SD channels as well if they wanted to make MPEG4 SD versions of everything available on 101. But I agree, they can surely make it work on 27 transponders for a time (or I suppose even keep 95W active a little longer...that's rented space on a satellite launched in 2002 so it won't last forever but there may be some wiggle room there)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

GordonGekko said:


> I hope they keep the duplicate SD channels because fast forwarding sports on SD is smoother than on HD.


What you're seeing is actually the difference between MPEG2 and MPEG4, so even if they keep MPEG4 SD versions of everything I doubt you'll see smoothness of FF you want.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> they will also be dropping the satellites at 95W and 119W


What's going to happen with 110w?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> True, but they will also be dropping the satellites at 95W and 119W and would need to include those SD channels as well if they wanted to make MPEG4 SD versions of everything available on 101. But I agree, they can surely make it work on 27 transponders for a time (or I suppose even keep 95W active a little longer...that's rented space on a satellite launched in 2002 so it won't last forever but there may be some wiggle room there)


I have not done the math but I am thinking 15 MPEG2 channels per transponder being replaced by 30-40 MPEG4 channels per transponder. A rough guess.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

TheRatPatrol said:


> What's going to happen with 110w?


Until there is a Ku DBS satellite at 101W that can provide service to Puerto Rico. 110W will have to stay as its supplement.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

James Long said:


> I have not done the math but I am thinking 15 MPEG2 channels per transponder being replaced by 30-40 MPEG4 channels per transponder. A rough guess.


Minor note:

DIRECTV's max is 14 MPEG-2 channels per Ku DBS tp. 

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> Minor note:
> 
> DIRECTV's max is 14 MPEG-2 channels per Ku DBS tp.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


We have to consider the terrible quality of their MPEG2 SD channels, which is caused by having to pack so many of them into 26 CONUS transponders on 101. I would not assume more than 20-25 MPEG4 SD channels per transponder if they wanted reasonable quality. With that, they could easily carry everything on 101, 119 and 95 on 101 alone.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> We have to consider the terrible quality of their MPEG2 SD channels, which is caused by having to pack so many of them into 26 CONUS transponders on 101. I would not assume more than 20-25 MPEG4 SD channels per transponder if they wanted reasonable quality. With that, they could easily carry everything on 101, 119 and 95 on 101 alone.


20-25 would be fair and would put them in the ballpark with what DISH is doing with MPEG4 (although DISH is also using "turbo" 8PSK transponders). I looked at a couple of the "40" transponders I was thinking of and saw that there were duplicate channels (the same feed numbered multiple times). In any case, 20 channels * 26 transponders is 520 channels. 25 * 26 is 650. That should be enough space until they can get a new satellite launched.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

slice1900 said:


> What you're seeing is actually the difference between MPEG2 and MPEG4, so even if they keep MPEG4 SD versions of everything I doubt you'll see smoothness of FF you want.


On another thread I asked other Directv veterans about this, I seem to remember that some were unsure if MPEG4 would drop in FF quality from MPEG 2 or even if it did, it would still be superior to HD fast forward.

I tested out a few channels that were determined to be broadcasting in SD MPEG 4, they were obscure channels, somewhere in the 375 range (I would have to search my old posts for a definitive answer), fast forwarding seemed to be no different on these channels in comparison to the SD MPEG 2 channels.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

GordonGekko said:


> On another thread I asked other Directv veterans about this, I seem to remember that some were unsure if MPEG4 would drop in FF quality from MPEG 2 or even if it did, it would still be superior to HD fast forward.
> 
> I tested out a few channels that were determined to be broadcasting in SD MPEG 4, they were obscure channels, somewhere in the 375 range (I would have to search my old posts for a definitive answer), fast forwarding seemed to be no different on these channels in comparison to the SD MPEG 2 channels.


I don't see why it would matter whether the MPEG4 channel was HD or SD as far as fast forwarding.

Perhaps what you are seeing is an artifact of the original encoding. Some channels are uplinked from the networks as MPEG2, some as MPEG4. Directv converts them to what they need.

On my Tivo I observe some channels that FF very smoothly, and some that FF in a more herky jerky fashion. It used to be more noticeable on my Premiere, it is less noticeable on my Bolt. Because of different hardware, because of faster processor....I have no idea. But my cable company's HD channels are all MPEG2, but I'm sure some were converted from MPEG4. FWIW, I see a bit of a jerky fast forward on FX, but FXX is smooth. I would think they'd both be uplinked with the same encoding, so who knows?

All I'm saying is you shouldn't make any assumptions about what you're gonna get until you get it. And maybe using different better hardware (i.e. newer clients) will have some effect...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> 20-25 would be fair and would put them in the ballpark with what DISH is doing with MPEG4 (although DISH is also using "turbo" 8PSK transponders). I looked at a couple of the "40" transponders I was thinking of and saw that there were duplicate channels (the same feed numbered multiple times). In any case, 20 channels * 26 transponders is 520 channels. 25 * 26 is 650. That should be enough space until they can get a new satellite launched.


One thing I wonder is if Directv designs T16 expressly to go to 101 if they wouldn't use 24 36 MHz transponders instead of 32 24 MHz transponders. Since they don't share it with anyone there's no reason to use the "standard" Ku width of 24 MHz. You get about 11% more bandwidth using the 36 MHz wide transponders...


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

slice1900 said:


> I don't see why it would matter whether the MPEG4 channel was HD or SD as far as fast forwarding.
> 
> Perhaps what you are seeing is an artifact of the original encoding. Some channels are uplinked from the networks as MPEG2, some as MPEG4. Directv converts them to what they need.
> 
> ...


I can live with the even worse HD fast forward as long as Directv ditches the progress bar fade, I adjusted to the lower quality when upgrading to the HR54 from the Directv Tivo R10 but it meant relying on the scoreboard, especially during NBA games, I don't know, I fear this ATT takeover is going to send Directv over the cliff, hopefully I am wrong.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

GordonGekko said:


> I can live with the even worse HD fast forward as long as Directv ditches the progress bar fade, I adjusted to the lower quality when upgrading to the HR54 from the Directv Tivo R10 but it meant relying on the scoreboard, especially during NBA games, I don't know, I fear this ATT takeover is going to send Directv over the cliff, hopefully I am wrong.


Yeah mpeg4 no matter SD or Hi Definition is about the same ffwding.

And they have mentioned fixing that ridiculous play bar fade so there is hope.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

inkahauts said:


> Yeah mpeg4 no matter SD or Hi Definition is about the same ffwding.
> 
> And they have mentioned fixing that ridiculous play bar fade so there is hope.


Are you certain of this, I tried some channels that people on this site noted are SD MPEG-4 channels and it seemed to be better than the HD channels and similar to the SD MPEG-2 channels, of course it is all perception so I could be off and I was not able to try FF on a sports match (the MPEG-4 SD channels are a few of the odd ones above 375).


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> One thing I wonder is if Directv designs T16 expressly to go to 101 if they wouldn't use 24 36 MHz transponders instead of 32 24 MHz transponders. Since they don't share it with anyone there's no reason to use the "standard" Ku width of 24 MHz. You get about 11% more bandwidth using the 36 MHz wide transponders...


That is an interesting thought ... but although they do not share 101 they need to make sure they do not interfere with 110. The FCC would also need to adjust their licensing since the licenses are assigned by DBS transponder not in a 500 MHz block.

From an RF standpoint I would not expect interference as long as the signal levels are kept within the limits. But DIRECTV gave DISH grief a few years ago when E10 was launched to 110 (allegedly interfering with 101 and 119) so I would not expect any "non standard" use of the DBS band to go unopposed. (Unless DIRECTV gave DISH something in return for not opposing the change - such as 11 transponders at 119.  The transfer of any transponders from DIRECTV to DISH is likely to be opposed - as if a third satellite carrier could be viable on 11 transponders.)

Licensing is a chess game.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> That is an interesting thought ... but although they do not share 101 they need to make sure they do not interfere with 110. The FCC would also need to adjust their licensing since the licenses are assigned by DBS transponder not in a 500 MHz block.
> 
> From an RF standpoint I would not expect interference as long as the signal levels are kept within the limits. But DIRECTV gave DISH grief a few years ago when E10 was launched to 110 (allegedly interfering with 101 and 119) so I would not expect any "non standard" use of the DBS band to go unopposed. (Unless DIRECTV gave DISH something in return for not opposing the change - such as 11 transponders at 119.  The transfer of any transponders from DIRECTV to DISH is likely to be opposed - as if a third satellite carrier could be viable on 11 transponders.)
> 
> Licensing is a chess game.


I'm not sure Directv can actually "give" Dish any transponders. All they can do is stop using and immediately return the licenses to the FCC, which would allow Dish to petition to use them on a temporary basis like they do the ones at 61.5. But unless they use them as a way to get something out of Dish, it is more likely IMHO that Directv stops using them but doesn't take any action with the FCC. I'm not sure how long transponders have to go unused before they would be considered "abandoned" and the FCC could take them back, but presumably at some point Dish would petition the FCC asking that they be forfeit due to lack of use. Directv could make a claim about potential future use (i.e. if 4K becomes really big or something) and drag the process out as long as possible.

Obviously there needs to be a standard transponder layout for any slot that's shared like 110 or 119 (though Dish has gone a bit non-standard and reduced their roll off significantly for the 'turbo' transponders and Directv didn't complain to my knowledge) but I don't think it matters for 101. Using a non standard layout that only has some overlap with the layout at 110 rather than exactly overlapping it would _reduce_ any potential interference, not increase it, so that would be a hard argument for Dish to make.

Directv built satellites with 36 MHz wide Ku transponders for the Latin American market (SKYM-1) so there is precedence for this.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

GordonGekko said:


> Are you certain of this, I tried some channels that people on this site noted are SD MPEG-4 channels and it seemed to be better than the HD channels and similar to the SD MPEG-2 channels, of course it is all perception so I could be off and I was not able to try FF on a sports match (the MPEG-4 SD channels are a few of the odd ones above 375).


I've never seen fluid ffwd on a DIRECTV DVR for mpeg4. Only on a DIRECTV TiVo. So that doesn't even count as far as I'm concerned.

But then I have to checked in a long time but I seriously doubt DIRECTV cares enough since if they did they'd make the Hi Definition much better. It's terrible right now and always has been as far as I am concerned but I'd never record anything especially sports in SD to get better ffwd...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I don’t see DIRECTV ever giving up 119. I dont think it’s going away just maybe changing what they carry.

Unless dish wants to swap a lot of 110 for 119 or something which I dont see happening either.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

inkahauts said:


> I've never seen fluid ffwd on a DIRECTV DVR for mpeg4. Only on a DIRECTV TiVo. So that doesn't even count as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> But then I have to checked in a long time but I seriously doubt DIRECTV cares enough since if they did they'd make the Hi Definition much better. It's terrible right now and always has been as far as I am concerned but I'd never record anything especially sports in SD to get better ffwd...


But again, there are only a few MPEG-4 SD channels, so unless you have tried FF on these, how would you know? And I am not comparing the old Directv Tivo's, those are superior to any Directv DVR, I am comparing SD to HD on the HR-54, breaking it down further with SD MPEG-2 vs SD MPEG-4.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> I'm not sure Directv can actually "give" Dish any transponders.


I'd expect it to be structured as a sale of the licenses. The word "give" referring to conceding the licenses to DISH instead of leaving them in limbo.

DIRECTV could use them for backhauls or commercial channels. If I recall correctly DISH's licenses at 148 remained valid for a couple of years after they removed the satellite from the slot. When the licenses come up for renewal DIRECTV would need to tell the FCC how they planned to restore service (if there isn't something there). It does not need to be full use of every transponder ... just enough to say the license is in use.



slice1900 said:


> Obviously there needs to be a standard transponder layout for any slot that's shared like 110 or 119 (though Dish has gone a bit non-standard and reduced their roll off significantly for the 'turbo' transponders and Directv didn't complain to my knowledge) but I don't think it matters for 101.


DIRECTV complained.

Somewhere I have a chart of the history of each license and how they were transferred to DIRECTV, DISH or abandoned. It is probably in an old post on DBSTalk. DISH was the only DBS company to actually build out all of their allotment of transponders (although they did not build out all of the transponders that they received by purchasing other companies). Don't gloss over the fact that these are transponder licenses.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I don't see DIRECTV ever giving up 119. I dont think it's going away just maybe changing what they carry.
> 
> Unless dish wants to swap a lot of 110 for 119 or something which I dont see happening either.


According to Stuart Sweet this was officially announced to dealers, so unless you think he got it wrong or Directv lied to their dealers I think we can consider 119 dead in less than 11 months.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> I'd expect it to be structured as a sale of the licenses. The word "give" referring to conceding the licenses to DISH instead of leaving them in limbo.
> 
> DIRECTV could use them for backhauls or commercial channels. If I recall correctly DISH's licenses at 148 remained valid for a couple of years after they removed the satellite from the slot. When the licenses come up for renewal DIRECTV would need to tell the FCC how they planned to restore service (if there isn't something there). It does not need to be full use of every transponder ... just enough to say the license is in use.


In 2014 Directv renewed the license for the satellite at 119 until 2021, so I guess they could keep them 'active' at least through that date even if customer equipment will no longer be listening after Apr 1 2019.

Of course the license for a satellite isn't the same thing as a license for transponders at a certain location. AFAIK those are "use it or lose it" but I don't know that "use it" necessarily means that customer equipment has to be listening, only that something has to be broadcasting. Even if D7S needs to retire in 2021, they could potentially move D9S which was designed to take over at 119 if need be. Don't know how long that will last, but D8 has fuel life until 2034 so Directv could potentially block Dish from getting their odd transponders at 119 for a VERY long time by moving D8 once they have a new satellite at 101.



James Long said:


> Somewhere I have a chart of the history of each license and how they were transferred to DIRECTV, DISH or abandoned. It is probably in an old post on DBSTalk. DISH was the only DBS company to actually build out all of their allotment of transponders (although they did not build out all of the transponders that they received by purchasing other companies). Don't gloss over the fact that these are transponder licenses.


Did they originally offer only per transponder licenses instead of whole slots way back when? I guess if they were allocated this way Directv couldn't risk building a satellite with 36 MHz transponders unless they were 100% certain they could use it. To get that certainty they would have had to file something with the FCC, and since nothing has shown up yet...

Of course if T16 ends up going to 103, and D15 moves from 103 to 101 the question is moot as D15 has a standard set of 32 24 MHz Ku transponders.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

GordonGekko said:


> But again, there are only a few MPEG-4 SD channels, so unless you have tried FF on these, how would you know? And I am not comparing the old Directv Tivo's, those are superior to any Directv DVR, I am comparing SD to HD on the HR-54, breaking it down further with SD MPEG-2 vs SD MPEG-4.


Like I said it's been a while since I saw it but when it first came out on the HR20 it was apparent there was a difference with mpeg4 regardless of Hi Definition or SD.

And I've never liked TiVo. They are inferior in many ways to almost all DVRs I've ever used. I'm not counting anything recent I haven't played with them but if you still have to do more than hit record twice to set a series record then they are still stupid...

And since they could never record my Lakers games correctly automatically they flat out sucked.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> Of course the license for a satellite isn't the same thing as a license for transponders at a certain location. AFAIK those are "use it or lose it" but I don't know that "use it" necessarily means that customer equipment has to be listening, only that something has to be broadcasting.


My understanding is that as long as "something" is there (a satellite transmitting a transponder) the license is safe. Not all transponders would need to be active to be considered "in use" and it would not need to be channels directly available to their DBS subscribers. Shutting down all transponders and moving the satellite(s) away would mean "something" was not there.



slice1900 said:


> Did they originally offer only per transponder licenses instead of whole slots way back when?


Yes. Most of the original allotments were for blocks of 8 or 11 transponders. The allotments were done in pairs, one block eastern (61.5, 101, 110, 119) one block western (148, 157, 166, 175). DIRECTV was assigned most but not all of the transponders at 101 with the remainder assigned (officially) to USSB. USSB had three transponders allotted that were not assigned to a transponder ... the FCC assigned them to 110 before auctioning off the rest of 110 (which DISH eventually bought). The auctions were not "paired" (no western allotment to match the eastern allotment).

(More details: DIRECTV Satellite Discussion D-15 @103W )


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> My understanding is that as long as "something" is there (a satellite transmitting a transponder) the license is safe. Not all transponders would need to be active to be considered "in use" and it would not need to be channels directly available to their DBS subscribers. Shutting down all transponders and moving the satellite(s) away would mean "something" was not there.


In that case Directv would be able to move D8 to 119 and keep Dish from getting those 11 transponders until it runs out of fuel and needs to be retired in 2034. And while I doubt D9S has anything like 16 years of fuel life left (which is a result of the way D8 was launched requiring less fuel to achieve orbit) they could probably park it at 110 until the middle of next decade...

They might as well, I'm not sure how much market there is for a used Ku satellite configured for CONUS that's only odd or even transponders, and in the case of D9S has a lot of spot beams nobody else would want.


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

no way will they drop the 119 license.
Many years ago there was a lawsuit about the 12.2-12.7 license bidding process.
Out of that, the judge said they had to set up new bidding procedures (which may not have ever happened).
If they drop the licenses, they have to go out for open bidding which neither At&t or Dish would want to happen.

For example, Dish has a couple transponders on 61.5 that were abandoned by another provider. No one ever applied for the licenses, so those transponders are on "temporary" use by Dish pending anyone else wanting to bid for them,

It could be that AT&T would use 119 for Mexico service. Their present partners (sky?) uses a FSS satellite and the much smaller dbs antenna would be appealing --- similar to what Dish is doing at the Mexico 77 slot.

I just looked up the at&t first quarter report and it shows rapid growth in Mexico with a jump of 3 million wireless customers in the first quarter.
I can imagine them wanting to duplicate what they are doing with the AT&T Directv lash up.

Or they might lease the transponders to Dish (dish provided directv with satellite service a few years back when they were having satellite problems)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

spear61 said:


> For example, Dish has a couple transponders on 61.5 that were abandoned by another provider. No one ever applied for the licenses, so those transponders are on "temporary" use by Dish pending anyone else wanting to bid for them,


Those two transponders have never been permanently assigned. DISH used them under STA (special temporary authority) until Continental (Cablevision/Rainbow DBS) launched the VOOM service. Continental convinced the FCC to give them the STA on those two transponders since DISH had many more DBS transponders in their system. When Voom failed and DISH bought the satellite assets the FCC gave DISH the STA. DISH asked for a permanent assignment but that was refused. DISH was able to get the FCC to move the STA transponders to #1 and #2 (instead of #23 and #24) and the FCC no longer requires DISH to renew the STA.

It would take a serious effort for DISH to lose use of the two STA transponders - pretty much a new satellite carrier with a satellite that they could launch to or move to 61.5 - and FCC permission to make that move.

So far DISH is the only company that has abandoned a DBS transponder that had been actively licensed. They gave up their licenses at 148.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

spear61 said:


> If they drop the licenses, they have to go out for open bidding which neither At&t or Dish would want to happen.


Why would AT&T/Directv care if licenses they no longer want went out for open bidding? There's no chance anyone is going to try to start up a third satellite company to compete with Directv and Dish, and even if they did the 11 transponders on 119 and 3 on 110 isn't nearly enough for a viable service.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> Why would AT&T/Directv care if licenses they no longer want went out for open bidding? There's no chance anyone is going to try to start up a third satellite company to compete with Directv and Dish, and even if they did the 11 transponders on 119 and 3 on 110 isn't nearly enough for a viable service.


They would make more money selling or leasing the transponders. They are a asset that should not be summarily discarded.

I am sure DIRECTV will find some use for the transponders other than abandonment.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> They would make more money selling or leasing the transponders. They are a asset that should not be summarily discarded.
> 
> I am sure DIRECTV will find some use for the transponders other than abandonment.


Who would possibly be interested in 11 transponders at 119 except Dish? Directv might want to effectively abandon them as far as no longer using them for their customers, while leaving a satellite in place broadcasting to keep the license, to keep Dish from getting their hands on them. That might be worth more to them than selling/leasing them to Dish - depends on whether AT&T really cares about Dish as a satellite competitor or not.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It seems that you are arguing with yourself. If the transponders are of no value why do anything to protect them?

The signals carried do not need to be delivered to residential customers - or to the US. There are plenty of options that remain open as long as the licenses remain intact. And while no one could build a system as robust as DISH or DIRECTV on 11 transponders the location at 119 is good real estate to reach the entire US.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

James Long said:


> The signals carried do not need to be delivered to residential customers


Yeah, they could just do what Dish does with 121 and use 119's transponders for commercial/private purposes.

Busch's private channel is currently on 119, along with many of the audio channels that used to be only available for commercial subscribers.
Right now the rest of the private channels use the same pool of part time HD Cinema channels and reserved SD bandwidth as residential part time channels. They could devote 119 to the rest of the private channels so they can avoid conflicts on sports heavy days where they also have commitments for private broadcasts and commercial PPV events.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

KyL416 said:


> Yeah, they could just do what Dish does with 121 and use 119's transponders for commercial/private purposes.
> 
> Busch's private channel is currently on 119, along with many of the audio channels that used to be only available for commercial subscribers.
> Right now the rest of the private channels use the same pool of part time HD Cinema channels and reserved SD bandwidth as residential part time channels. They could devote 119 to the rest of the private channels so they can avoid conflicts on sports heavy days where they also have commitments for private broadcasts and commercial PPV events.


commercial PPV events don't use the same feeds? Do they have stuff like pub pint glass on them from time to time?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

JoeTheDragon said:


> commercial PPV events don't use the same feeds? Do they have stuff like pub pint glass on them from time to time?


They're usually seperate for things like that, as well as things that are commercial subscribers only. Like Boxing events that air on HBO and Showtime are PPV only for commercial subscribers, and WWE PPVs for blast areas. (i.e. Money in the Bank was in the 9530s on Sunday, but not available at all for residential subscribers)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> It seems that you are arguing with yourself. If the transponders are of no value why do anything to protect them?


They're of value to Dish - but only Dish - because Dish could improve their service in the western arc. So it would presumably be in Directv's interest to hold onto those transponders simply to keep out of Dish's hands. i.e. certainly not worth launching a satellite to hold, but moving an existing satellite they no longer need that has some life left, sure.


----------



## zippyfrog (Jul 14, 2010)

I would bet Dish would love to get their hands on the rest of the 119 and 110 transponders. If they were able to do that, they would have all 32 transponders at both 119 and 110. If that were the case, wouldn't Dish be able to lose 129 all together and have all US services on just 119/110 for Western Arc, just like they have all services on 61.5/72.7 for eastern arc? (and doesn't Dish's lease of the 129 satellite end in 2019?)


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I saw this post at another forum about the future of DTV satellites.

"By stating to me they were told by upper management the new push and focus is for content delivery over broadband and that all new satellite purchases have been canceled except for one in the works, the engineering group that builds out the satellite infrastructure has nearly all been laid off, the group that flew some of the sats has been disbanded or laid off, etc.

At least one satellite uplink facility has had massive fiber build out, much more than could ever be used for what that facility had been doing. Plus the techs and engineers at some satellite uplink facilities that maintain the satellite uplink equipment have been laid off and scaled back to a fraction of the personnel they had. The latter may just be ATT not understanding the nature of the satellite business and gambling that the equipment will not require maintenance and will not break."


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> I saw this post at another forum about the future of DTV satellites.
> 
> "By stating to me they were told by upper management the new push and focus is for content delivery over broadband and that all new satellite purchases have been canceled except for one in the works, the engineering group that builds out the satellite infrastructure has nearly all been laid off, the group that flew some of the sats has been disbanded or laid off, etc.
> 
> At least one satellite uplink facility has had massive fiber build out, much more than could ever be used for what that facility had been doing. Plus the techs and engineers at some satellite uplink facilities that maintain the satellite uplink equipment have been laid off and scaled back to a fraction of the personnel they had. The latter may just be ATT not understanding the nature of the satellite business and gambling that the equipment will not require maintenance and will not break."


Wow ... if accurate then very very depressing. 

As this makes it indeed a case of AT&T bought DIRECTV to really dismantle it and try to convert most all of its subs. to broadband OTT solutions. 

Guess the AT&T logo truly is the "Deathstar" ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> Wow ... if accurate then very very depressing.
> 
> As this makes it indeed a case of AT&T bought DIRECTV to really dismantle it and try to convert most all of its subs. to broadband OTT solutions.
> 
> Guess the AT&T logo truly is the "Deathstar"


Looks like all of us satellite customers will be switching to Dish Network in the future.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I think it will still take time to transition all DTV customers to OTT so they will have to keep DTV around for awhile.


----------



## DMG (Feb 7, 2008)

I’m sure I’m not the only satellite customer who has satellite TV because cable and decent broadband are not available where I live. I thought that was a pretty significant chunk of DirecTV's business!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

zippyfrog said:


> I would bet Dish would love to get their hands on the rest of the 119 and 110 transponders. If they were able to do that, they would have all 32 transponders at both 119 and 110. If that were the case, wouldn't Dish be able to lose 129 all together and have all US services on just 119/110 for Western Arc, just like they have all services on 61.5/72.7 for eastern arc? (and doesn't Dish's lease of the 129 satellite end in 2019?)


14 transponders at 119/110 does not replace 32 transponders at 129. DISH would be able to move all of the ConUS feeds off of 129 and reach the upper northeast states from 110-119 (for those who have trouble with the 129 footprint and have trouble receiving Eastern Arc). But 129 would still be needed for LIL.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> I saw this post at another forum about the future of DTV satellites.


I tend to ignore unsourced rumors. If there is any truth to the actions listed (layoffs and cutbacks after excessive upgrades) they can be explained as poor management decisions (we don't need techs since the new stuff won't break). I don't know how any company cancels an order that they have not placed.

I have seen too many stories based on stories where the truth has been lost after being retold on the fourth or fifth retelling. Read an article on Website A that states "According to a story on Website B" which was a rewrite of a story on Website C based on an article on Website D which was the writer's impression of something they read on Website E based on something they heard from an unnamed source. Or at best a named source who was taken out of context.

I remember an old joke about two White House reporters speculating about what the president might do. They both went back and wrote stories "unnamed sources inside the White House are saying ..."


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Yeh, sor


James Long said:


> I tend to ignore unsourced rumors. If there is any truth to the actions listed (layoffs and cutbacks after excessive upgrades) they can be explained as poor management decisions (we don't need techs since the new stuff won't break). I don't know how any company cancels an order that they have not placed.
> 
> I have seen too many stories based on stories where the truth has been lost after being retold on the fourth or fifth retelling. Read an article on Website A that states "According to a story on Website B" which was a rewrite of a story on Website C based on an article on Website D which was the writer's impression of something they read on Website E based on something they heard from an unnamed source. Or at best a named source who was taken out of context.
> 
> I remember an old joke about two White House reporters speculating about what the president might do. They both went back and wrote stories "unnamed sources inside the White House are saying ..."


Yeh, sorry I should have added at the beginning of the post that I wasn't sure if this was true or not.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Yeah ...

That's why I stated, but should have emphasized "if accurate" earlier ...

And pardon me if I'm just behind the times here. And not up to date with the current state of the art.

But I really don't get all this OTT mania AT&T is allegedly fixated on.

Is the internet backbone, server technology, the majority of everyone's internet connection speeds, ect., anywhere near ready to support over 20 million streaming subs.like that?

I have a Genie and 5 HR24s for 15 active tuners (not counting the two active, but unused, Genie tuners reserved for future 4K bonding). Even if AT&T can give me the streaming equivalent of 2/3 that, are 10 max. simultaneous streams easily delivered OTT today for instance?

Current internet is standard 100/12 Spectrum High Speed ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

HoTat2 said:


> Yeah ...
> 
> That's why I stated, but should have emphasized "if accurate" earlier ...
> 
> ...


I think I read somewhere that DTV NOW could have up to 10 streams.

I also found this Seeking Alpha transcript and in Stephenson says this.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/41...ions-broker-conference-transcript?part=single

*Randall Stephenson*

Yes, 2017 was an interesting year in video. We have had, since the day we acquired DIRECTV, an expectation that traditional linear video would decline, and we had our expectations on what that decline look like. We had ranges around it. 2017 took a precipitous drop. I mean, it dropped. And so with the drop, though, it's now back on the decline pace that we were anticipating. And so we had a -- 2017 was just kind of interesting that you just had this precipitous drop, and now you're back on kind of the pace. You're at a lower level, but you're back at the pace that we were expecting from the very beginning. And so the shift from traditional to over-the-top was much greater than we expected. But now we're kind of back where we expected, and so the objective is shore up the profitability on the streaming. That's how you keep the equation in check. So to answer your question, yes, I think 2018 is probably going to be the worst of it. And as we stand up the new capabilities, ARPUs are higher, returns on capital are higher, we should see better going forward.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> I think I read somewhere that DTV NOW could have up to 10 streams.


Today: A third simultaneous video stream (so three people can view different programming on one account) for $5 additionally each month.
"Could" have 10 streams? They could also charge $5 per additional stream. And raise their base price. And charge $10 per month for 100 hours of cloud storage. A lot could happen.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Back to the the topic: 
- do we have any knowledge if DSS mode could carry MPEG-4/H.264 video ?
Perhaps DLA (Latin America) has it already ?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> Back to the the topic:
> - do we have any knowledge if DSS mode could carry MPEG-4/H.264 video ?
> Perhaps DLA (Latin America) has it already ?


Whether the modulation scheme is DSS, DVB-S2, QAM256 or ATSC whether the bitstream they encode translates into MPEG2, MPEG4 or an MP3 of AC/DC's greatest hits shouldn't matter.

I don't think Directv will need more than two DSS transponders if they have reason to minimize them (i.e. some limitation on MPEG4, wanting to use FEC ratios not available with DSS, etc.) so I don't think it will be an issue.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> I saw this post at another forum about the future of DTV satellites.
> 
> "By stating to me they were told by upper management the new push and focus is for content delivery over broadband and that all new satellite purchases have been canceled except for one in the works, the engineering group that builds out the satellite infrastructure has nearly all been laid off, the group that flew some of the sats has been disbanded or laid off, etc.
> 
> At least one satellite uplink facility has had massive fiber build out, much more than could ever be used for what that facility had been doing. Plus the techs and engineers at some satellite uplink facilities that maintain the satellite uplink equipment have been laid off and scaled back to a fraction of the personnel they had. The latter may just be ATT not understanding the nature of the satellite business and gambling that the equipment will not require maintenance and will not break."


I'm skeptical about that guy's stories. They scream "disgruntled former employee with an axe to grind" to me, so I'd take them with a grain of salt. He didn't even know that Directv had another satellite in construction in a previous conversation with him, so even if he's on the level he's not very well informed.

Getting a massive fiber upgrade makes sense, AT&T is in the networking business after all and you need a lot of additional infrastructure to stream to millions of people. Where else would you stream the IP version of Directv from other than one (or likely both) of their broadcast centers where they have all the dishes that collect the programming from various networks and then uplink it to their satellites?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> Whether the modulation scheme is DSS, DVB-S2, QAM256 or ATSC whether the bitstream they encode translates into MPEG2, MPEG4 or an MP3 of AC/DC's greatest hits shouldn't matter.


I know that and would say same, but ! We don't know all pieces of a chain an equipment (it's tons of HW !) involved into transmitting via DSS, because it's not just modulation scheme, but much more ...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

P Smith said:


> I know that and would say same, but ! We don't know all pieces of a chain an equipment (it's tons of HW !) involved into transmitting via DSS, because it's not just modulation scheme, but much more ...


As long as we don't know then his guess is as good as yours, or mine. And it seems that all three of us would agree with the scientifically logical answer.

I do not see why DIRECTV would want to put MPEG-4/H.264 on a DSS transponder when there are better modulation schemes available on all receivers that can handle an MPEG-4/H.264 encoding. The only positive proof that MPEG-4/H.264 on DSS would work would be if DIRECTV actually did it. If they have not done it on some test channel somewhere on the system we may never know.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

that's why I'm looking broader - SkyMex, DTV Latin America, etc
perhaps the test converted into normal broadcasting already somewhere, where DTV also have sat business


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> I'm skeptical about that guy's stories. They scream "disgruntled former employee with an axe to grind" to me, so I'd take them with a grain of salt. He didn't even know that Directv had another satellite in construction in a previous conversation with him, so even if he's on the level he's not very well informed.
> 
> Getting a massive fiber upgrade makes sense, AT&T is in the networking business after all and you need a lot of additional infrastructure to stream to millions of people. Where else would you stream the IP version of Directv from other than one (or likely both) of their broadcast centers where they have all the dishes that collect the programming from various networks and then uplink it to their satellites?


That's a good point about the massive fiber upgrade for the IP version of DTV at the DTV broadcast center, plus I guess their goal of upgrading all FTTN and FTTH. Maybe that's why he thinks that is going to replace DTV over SatelliteTV? Also I didn't know he didn't know about DTV having another satellite under construction.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> I do not see why DIRECTV would want to put MPEG-4/H.264 on a DSS transponder when there are better modulation schemes available on all receivers that can handle an MPEG-4/H.264 encoding.


They will have to keep at least two DSS transponders around on 101, because there are some H2x/HR2x boxes that have a network tuner that's DSS/DVB-S only and can't do DVB-S2 even some fairly recent ones like one of the H24 models.

If for some reason they CAN'T use MPEG4 on a DSS transponder, they have the follow options:

1) don't carry any channels, just guide and other non-programming metadata
2) continue using MPEG2 just for those channels
3) use DVB-S and MPEG4

Of those I think #1 is probably the most likely assuming they need only two such transponders (one even, one odd, for legacy non-SWM setups) otherwise #2 would be far more likely IMHO than #3.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

When writing the last post I had an interesting thought. Currently legacy mode receivers connected to a SL5 LNB get their guide data from 119 when watching a channel on 103. When 119 goes away, those legacy mode receivers will no longer be able to receive guide data when watching a channel on 103 unless the SL5 is replaced by an SL3 (which crosswires 101 to show up where 119 normally would on the 103/110/119 22 KHz 'tone' polarities) or they are upgraded to SWM.

AFAIK Directv isn't addressing this, they'll just rely on customers who experience problems to call and the installer to resolve it. Presumably by upgrading to SWM, since all the non-SWM capable receivers will be obsolete at the same time 119 goes away.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

HoTat2 said:


> Yeah ...
> 
> That's why I stated, but should have emphasized "if accurate" earlier ...
> 
> ...


let's see them try an sports bar on OTT (may in att internet zone they can do free internet / or even business fiber (u-verse class with custom firmware (no nat session limits)) Full DIA fiber at u-verse for business rates?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

JoeTheDragon said:


> on OTT


there is more appropriate thread for OTT off-topic AT&T To Launch Full DTV Using The Internet This Fall


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

P Smith said:


> there is more appropriate thread for OTT off-topic AT&T To Launch Full DTV Using The Internet This Fall


Sorry, I wasn't sure if I should put my post about the info if it was true about the future of satellite's and that according to him they cancelled one order and stopped production on all others because I guess he thought that proved they were going all OTT in this thread or my Full DTV Over The Internet thread.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

CraigerM said:


> the future of satellite's


just in case, the thread is about "*Directv announces 2019 date for dropping MPEG2 SD*"
not other thread about future of sats


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

P Smith said:


> just in case, the thread is about "*Directv announces 2019 date for dropping MPEG2 SD*"
> not other thread about future of sats


Sorry, I saw they were discussing in this thread what they would do with satellite's if they get rid of certain ones after the dropping MPEG 2 SD.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> Sorry, I saw they were discussing in this thread what they would do with satellite's if they get rid of certain ones after the dropping MPEG 2 SD.


We are. What happens next (after MPEG2 SD ends) is part of the question.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

CraigerM said:


> Sorry, I saw they were discussing in this thread what they would do with satellite's if they get rid of certain ones after the dropping MPEG 2 SD.


some people like to discuss everything in one thread 
as to sat future, it would be done by DTV behind curtains and will not affect its MPEG-2 cutoff


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

Are they haggling over renewal or are they doing a deal with Directv?

Dish 2nd Quarter 10Q.

"On July 30, 2018, we did not provide notice to renew our lease for the capacity of Ciel II. Accordingly, our lease for the capacity of Ciel II will expire in January 2019 at the conclusion of the initial term. There can be no assurance that the expiration of our lease for capacity of Ciel II will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition or otherwise disrupt our business."


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

isn't Ciel II at 129W provide most of dish HD channels ?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> isn't Ciel II at 129W provide most of dish HD channels ?


AFAIK, yes ...

For their Western Arc anyhow ....

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

Sorry in advance for dumbing down the conversation momentarily here but is there a possibility that some older LNB's will also have to be replaced or do all LNB's simply pass along whatever signal they receive, regardless of compression/format? I suppose there may be others as well but I am specifically thinking about the LNB's used in many carryout units that RVer's and tailgaters may still use since they were originally designed to operate in an mpeg2 only world.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

grover517 said:


> Sorry in advance for dumbing down the conversation momentarily here but is there a possibility that some older LNB's will also have to be replaced or *do all LNB's simply pass along whatever signal they receive*, regardless of compression/format? I suppose there may be others as well but I am specifically thinking about the LNB's used in many carryout units that RVer's and tailgaters may still use since *they were originally designed to operate in an mpeg2 only world*.


yes, passing sat signals but transponding to low freqs: from 12-20 GHz to 250-2150 MHz
nope - no MPEG dedication
what is inside of tpn mux/full stream doesn't matter - the audio/video compression algos
LNB designed for receive RF signals
matter is RF bands


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

grover517 said:


> Sorry in advance for dumbing down the conversation momentarily here but is there a possibility that some older LNB's will also have to be replaced or do all LNB's simply pass along whatever signal they receive, regardless of compression/format? I suppose there may be others as well but I am specifically thinking about the LNB's used in many carryout units that RVer's and tailgaters may still use since they were originally designed to operate in an mpeg2 only world.


Data in and data out. Every lnb ever made can handle any signal dtv has ever put out there. The key isnif it can see the locations and all the freq that are being used to broadcast. Has nothing to do with what format the programming is in.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> AFAIK, yes ...
> 
> For their Western Arc anyhow ....
> 
> Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


Surely Dish/Echostar has another satellite at 129, or plans to in the next few months? I don't see how they could just drop a satellite location carrying a lot of their HD channels without some sort of plan. Even if they were going to do a deal with Directv to get the transponders at 110/119 Directv is freeing up, that's not going to happen by January.

I mean, I get the warning in the 10K since presumably there is risk that whatever plan they have won't be ready in time. Obviously they must have a plan, but maybe it depends on an upcoming launch going without a hitch, or some other satellite being freed up in time to move to 129 and take over.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DISH has a satellite they can put there ... but do they have the licenses? I believe they were leasing satellite and licenses from Ciel. And the satellite they could put there would probably not match up for spotbeam coverage. In any case ... I don't believe DISH's issue has anything to do with DIRECTV's plans.


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

Oh gosh, I'm ssooo confused and need some help from you guys. DIRECTV has been notifying me that my old receives will need to be upgraded by April next year. I have contacted them to see what needs to be done and have gotten many different answers from different people. I have also read through this thread (and others), but am not technical enough to completely grasp what is being said. Please help me understand this in more simple English!

First what I have:
-Two D12 receivers, and a very old (but I love the best!) Hughes GAEBOA.
-No DVRs (and don't want any)
-Non-SWM "stuff"
-No HD. I Prefer SD, but have HD TVs so if there's no charge to upgrade then fine I'll do so. Clearly, I don't watch much TV and mainly watch cable news stations and movies (on regular package channels, the kind with commercials). Please don't reply that the whole world is in HD, and I'm really lost without it and just don't know it!!

What I want:
-Keep my Hughes GAEBOA receiver even if I lose locals with it.
-Not switch to SWM "stuff"
-Stay on an SD plan (if possible).

I have been told that my Hugues receiver just won't work at all next year, but others have said it will work, but I just won't get the local channels anymore. What are the actual facts? Are they known yet?

If my Hughes box is only MPEG2 and all MPEG2 will be going away, can I get another SD box that is MPEG4 as a replacement? Are the D12s only MPEG2?

Lastly, I was told that I'll need to upgrade to SWM hardware. I don't have that now, and don't want it (if it can be avoided). Will I be forced to change over to SWM equipment?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Since DIRECTV has made no official statements on exactly what's going to happen by April of '19. And is frankly doing a terrible PR job of informing subscribers of their intent this way. 

The best we can come up with is that all MPEG-2 based SD satellite programming feeds will be discontinued from the 101, 110, and 119W satellites. And while we understand the 119W satellite is to be turned off altogether, the type of programming (presumably MPEG-4 based) to take place from 101 and 110W (currently used only for Puerto Rico) is unknown.

Whatever the case though, your two D12s and sorry to say beloved Hughes GAEBOA receivers must be replaced for at least three H24s or H25s MPEG-4 capable HD boxes.

And also sorry to say you must upgrade to SWiM and a Ka/Ku SlimLine dish.

However, at last report DIRECTV was offering great upgrade deals for your situation. Like free equipment plus waiving the $15.00 a month advanced receiver fee. 

So call DIRECTV and ask (actually "insist") for the Loyalty Dept. to see what they'll offer.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Oh, ... and no, ...

DIRECTV has no SD only receivers that can receive MPEG-4 format signals.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

Thanks for the response, that was much more clear that anything else I have gotten thus far. I do have a couple more questions based on your reply:
1) What's the difference between a H24 and H25 and which do you think I would prefer based on my post.
2) My neighbor told me that if I need to upgrade to SWM technology then I can still use my same dish and LNBs, and just add something called a SWM8. Is this correct, or will I need an actual SWM dish?
3) So if 110 is only used in PR, and 119 is to be turned off, then I'll only need to get the 101 satellite, right? My current dish is currently aimed to get the 101 satellite so that's good, right?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

1) There's a bunch of technical differences, but nothing major that would affect you based on the description you gave us besides the H25 being smaller with an external power brick, while the H24 is larger and uses a standard power cord.

2 and 3) Nope, you'll need a newer dish capable of getting 99 and 103 in addition to 101

Las Vegas's SD locals are on 119, after the switch you will be getting the locals from the HD feeds on 99, and the receivers will output them to your TVs in whatever resolution they need to be.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

1) The H24 is older, larger, and may operate in SWiM or non-SWiM (or "legacy") mode. But the stock on this model is increasingly rare in DIRECTV's inventory and carried by their installers.

The H25 is newer, more plentiful, smaller and more compact, SWiM only. And may be mounted behind a TV out of sight which is very convenient for wall mounted TVs.

2) Yes you could do that (assuming 101W will continue to carry all the programming you want), but you would have to buy and install it yourself as DIRECTV won't, since this would be a non-standard installation.

3) It "might be good," except that no one knows for sure what programming or broadcast format DIRECTV intends to use at 101W beginning in April '19. 

There are two competing theories of either nationwide MPEG-4 based SD channels. Or a core group of the most popularly viewed HD channels will move there from the Ka band at 99 and/or 103W.

Either way though, even if you end up able to receive all the national channels you wish from 101W after the transition. Your local channels are only going to be available on the Ka band at 99/103W. So you'll need the Ka/Ku Slimline dish to receive them.


Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

Thanks guys! So please advise if I have this correct...

A) Come next April, actually two separate events are taking place at the same time. First is that they are stopping all MPEG2 encoding, and also they will stop using the 119 satellite. Do I have this right? If so DIRECTV’s statement that "Starting on 4/16/19, you will no longer be able to view your local channels with your current equipment." is accurate, but misleading in that the bigger problem is that I won’t be able to receive ANY channels at all with any of my current receivers. This makes sense, but, if true, I don’t understand why this isn’t understood by their own employees when I called!

B) Since I don’t care one bit about local channels (never watch them), or watching in HD, it seems like IF I can get the older H24 receivers, and IF they end up using the 101 satellite for nationwide MPEG-4 based SD channels, technically speaking, I wouldn’t need to upgrade my current 3 LNB (I think it’s called a Phase III) dish to a slimline dish, or mess around with any of the dish wiring. Do I have this right?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We are still reading between the lines ... Today, August 14th, 2018, we do not know exactly how DIRECTV will end MPEG2 encoding. There are differing opinions as to the way DIRECTV should handle the transition, but a precise timeline has not been announced.

Theoretically DIRECTV could turn off any remaining MPEG2 locals on the morning of 4/16/2019 and deal with the fallout of any non-converted customers. Or they could pick markets with the least number of customers and do a rolling shutoff of locals so they are not overwhelmed with people who waited the last minute. My *opinion* is that they will follow a rolling process. And my *opinion* is the end of MPEG2 national channels will also roll.

One thing is for sure ... do not EXPECT any non-MPEG4 capable receiver to function on or after 4/16/2019.

The big "IF" is whether all MPEG2 SD will be converted to MPEG4 SD on 101 or if customers with only 101 will lose channels in the conversion. As noted, the details have not been announced.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Julie said:


> Thanks guys! So please advise if I have this correct...
> 
> A) Come next April, actually two separate events are taking place at the same time. First is that they are stopping all MPEG2 encoding, and also they will stop using the 119 satellite. Do I have this right? If so DIRECTV's statement that "Starting on 4/16/19, you will no longer be able to view your local channels with your current equipment." is accurate, but misleading in that the bigger problem is that I won't be able to receive ANY channels at all with any of my current receivers. This makes sense, but, if true, I don't understand why this isn't understood by their own employees when I called!
> 
> B) Since I don't care one bit about local channels (never watch them), or watching in HD, it seems like IF I can get the older H24 receivers, and IF they end up using the 101 satellite for nationwide MPEG-4 based SD channels, technically speaking, I wouldn't need to upgrade my current 3 LNB (I think it's called a Phase III) dish to a slimline dish, or mess around with any of the dish wiring. Do I have this right?


Actually no you really don't have that right.

Why are you against the new dish? You'll have to change that at some point.. Just do it now and be done. And they won't have to rip out any wiring. In fact it'll use less wiring and they can use what's already in place just changing a couple things where stuff Connects.

They're likely telling you about locals now because what they've done in the past is done things by market. I think that's what they're doing now. So your locals will go MPEG-4 soon, and all the national stuff later on. There's a good chance that the stuff you watch will be spread out among the satellite you can't get with the current dish. Don't waste your time trying to avoid changing the dish now.

You also won't need to worry about which receiver they give you, you'll get whatever's on the truck. It will work with the new dish so you're good. You're not going to want to have to have them come out twice and they're probably not going to let you make them come out twice without charge.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Yes, it's pretty much as James and inkahauts state ....

As to your "A" ... It seems that much like us, DIRECTV higher ups in Engineering who undoubtedly have detailed knowledge of the SD transition, have apparently not sufficiently communicated enough details and specifics to their CSRs about how it's supposed to take place so they can explain it to customers.

Other than what's explained in these letters which is confusing in themselves as they usually just mention the upcoming termination of locals reception on SD only receivers, but nothing about nationals.

In RE: to your "B," yes that might work, if we can ever get a definitive answer about the future programming on 101W and if you don't care anything about losing your locals.

However, due to the H24's dwindling numbers, you'll almost certainly need to purchase them from a DIRECTV third-party distributor like Solid signal here for instance at $99.00 each.

Search: h24 receiver - Solid Signal

And because you don't know how long SS will continue to carry them, you may have to take your chances and purchase them now or soon and take your chances about what will happen to 101W next year.

I mean the worse that can happen is you'll have to upgrade the dish to a Slimline if things don't turn out as you hope at 101W since the H24s will work in either event.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Julie said:


> What I want:
> -Keep my Hughes GAEBOA receiver even if I lose locals with it.
> -Not switch to SWM "stuff"
> -Stay on an SD plan (if possible).


Why would you not want to switch to SWM "stuff"? As inkahauts said it is less wiring - one wire from the dish instead of 3 or 4 like you must currently have with the Phase III, and a single splitter which connects to your receivers. It is simpler and less trouble prone than what you have now.

Unfortunately your GAEBOA is going to stop working next year, not just for locals but for everything.

My understanding is that Directv is doing these upgrades for SD customers like yourself for free, not extending any commitments, and not increasing the price. Call the number in your letter, tell them you want to schedule an appointment but you want confirmation you will have the same service you have now - no increase in your bill, and no commitment. You just want three receivers to replace the ones you have now.

They will come out, replace your dish, replace your receivers with H24 or H25, and you can continue watching just like you always have. You will have locals, but you don't have to watch them


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> Why would you not want to switch to SWM "stuff"?


And why wouldn't she want to enjoy an HD picture on her HDTV's?


----------



## minimonster17 (Dec 20, 2014)

Changing gears slightly here, but will 119 still be used to house the Spanish channels after the 2019 drop? Or will they be migrated to the other satellites, or something else? I currently have a Slimline 5 Reverse Band Dish with the Choice w/ En Espanol package, and am wondering how the Spanish channels will be affected by the changeover.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

TheRatPatrol said:


> And why wouldn't she want to enjoy an HD picture on her HDTV's?


I believe the main issue is cost ... which is why she should confirm that any upgrade will be done without cost, increase in fees or extending commitment.

As to preferring SD to HD ... my father in law did that for the past few years. His cable company added HD channels and they could be received on his receiver (and displayed on his HDTV) but they put the HD on high channel numbers. He preferred the lower numbered SD channels. He recently moved and the new cable company automatically shows HD if the channel is available. He is slowly accepting the change.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I also wonder if she thinks there isn’t enough difference in picture because someone showed her Hi Definition before.. and it was actually all Hi Definition stuff but outputting in SD. That is also very common mistake that makes people think Hi Definition is a waste...

But at the end, this is a not even part of this conversation. They will take care of all costs so she needs to take advantage and just get it done right the first time... don’t try and do it half way and have to have it done again because she refused the proper dish six months latter.


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

James: Thanks, I totally now understand what you are saying about no more MPEG2 and thus no more of my beloved Hughes SD receiver (this is a real bummer for me because the receiver is so well designed I'm going to really miss it).

Inkahauts: Thanks for the response, but I'm confused again... What do I have wrong? I get you might not agree with my decision to want to watch SD channels (and totally understand why you would have that view), but where did I go wrong about not understanding the technology? I get that my IFs are big IFs, but I thought I finally understood what might be taking place. As for not wanting to change out the dish to SWM technology, I had a really really really bad experience with the original installer (way back when at my other house), and had to pay big bucks to have a private wiring contractor come out and fix everything. When I moved to my current home, I just went straight for hiring a private company. Clearly it all left such a bad taste in my mouth that I would just prefer to not fix it if it's not broken! I have paid good money for all my wiring, it works (as of today), and for the very little bit of TV I watch I should probably just cancel my account.

HoTat2: Your responses are super clear, thanks for helping an idiot like me figure this out. I looked at your solid signal link and also on ebay. I see that there are a few different submodels like -200 and -700 to the H24. Any idea which is the latest one that I would want should I go that route? As for waiting and seeing. Yes! I have absolutely no problem with being prepared, then waiting it out. If it doesn't go the way I hope then I can easily live without TV for a couple of weeks (heck even a couple of months) while upgrading to SWM technology, or possibly just cancel the account.

Slice1900: Thank you for also taking the time to respond. See my answer above to Inkahauts as to why I don't want to change over to SWM technology. Also, I get that it's less wires from the dish, but mine have all been professionally installed, and are already in place having been run through my attic, and inside my walls. I would have to have to change out the dish, add an outdoor splitter, add the power inverter, etc, etc. IF I keep DTV, and swap out the dish I might as well use legacy technology for HD. I see, at the solid signal link that HoTat2 provided, they have something called an SL3 for and a Slimline dish. I could just plug all three of my wires into it and be done (if I understand their upgrade guide correctly). Also, I now totally get that I can'y use my Hughes receiver. I'm bummed, but it is what it is.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Julie said:


> James: Thanks, I totally now understand what you are saying about no more MPEG2 and thus no more of my beloved Hughes SD receiver (this is a real bummer for me because the receiver is so well designed I'm going to really miss it).
> 
> Inkahauts: Thanks for the response, but I'm confused again... What do I have wrong? I get you might not agree with my decision to want to watch SD channels (and totally understand why you would have that view), but where did I go wrong about not understanding the technology? I get that my IFs are big IFs, but I thought I finally understood what might be taking place. As for not wanting to change out the dish to SWM technology, I had a really really really bad experience with the original installer (way back when at my other house), and had to pay big bucks to have a private wiring contractor come out and fix everything. When I moved to my current home, I just went straight for hiring a private company. Clearly it all left such a bad taste in my mouth that I would just prefer to not fix it if it's not broken! I have paid good money for all my wiring, it works (as of today), and for the very little bit of TV I watch I should probably just cancel my account.
> 
> ...


What you have wrong is that you are assuming that you won't ever need to see anything off of the 99 and 103 satelites because they only mention the locals, and you say you never watch any locals. To me your system is broken now, since it won't work properly and see all the sats in a year that you will need to see to get all the channels.

While that is a possibility, it's to small a possibility to even consider imho. There is zero reason for them to keep duplicating everything they have on multiple satelites. Some will argue there is, and there might be for a few channels, but money wise, att being as cheap as it is, I don't see them keeping multiple copies of the same channels all over when it costs them more money and will give them zero additional profit. I would Do the proper full conversion and do it once.

I get having a bad experience once, and while it's possible to have that happen again, I'd still do it right.

The wiring will barley be touched at all. Swap the dish, add a splitter at the dish (current dish has 4 outs, new one has one) and a different power supply in line by the tv. It won't be like the initial install at all. No new wires will need to be run. I'd go for the free upgrade of all of it, and if they guy seems incompetent, I'd tell him to leave and then hire an outside company again, but I doubt that will happen.

I do get worrying about the installers. I just think it's more than worth the risk because this is a simple upgrade, not a fresh install, so it's a lot simpler than before.

And the less times you need an installer the better so don't do it halfway, and need an installer again 6 months after the first one because you didn't want to swap the dish... you'd double your chances at having an installer you don't like.

And if you want, then go ahead and hire a private installer again. But again, do it once, so you don't have to have the private one come twice and pay them twice. Just do it once... but I suspect that DIRECTV won't let you use a private one to upgrade the boxes for free,so what you could do is have a private one come out and upgrade the dish one day, and DIRECTV come the next with the new boxes. You'd be without one tv for a day since the one box doesn't work swim, but it'd let them do the box upgrade and keep everything free other than you doing the dish yourself.

I just don't see them ever allowing an installer to come out for this free upgrade without also doing the dish. And I don't see them not charging you an Hi Definition fee and such if you don't have the upgrade done through them. Kind of stuck...

None of this has anything to do with Hi Definition and SD and you saying you don't care aHi Definition. Id expect that you'll only see one version of every channel by 2020... that's what this is about.

As for the different sub models, they are all the same, it makes no difference which version you get its just a matter of which manufacturer made it. But they are all made to the same specs..


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> There is zero reason for them to keep duplicating everything they have on multiple satelites.


DIRECTV offers in motion mobile service to vehicles including boats and airplanes. I do not believe AT&T|DIRECTV will be discarding that market.

Shifting those customers to DIRECTV NOW (already offered in airplanes via data networks) or the proposed "same lineup as DIRECTV satellite" streaming service (which we know less about than we know about the MPEG2 shut off) are options. But those customers could more cheaply move to DISH satellite and get HD without eating up data plans. There is still a place for a reliable DIRECTV satellite service in SD.


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

James: Thanks, I understand about the no cost upgrade. Cost to me isn't super significant, I mean I'm already paying a hundred bucks a month for service I rarely use. I'm the type of person who would rather pay more for what I want than get a free upgrade for something that I'm lukewarm about.

Inkahauts: It's not that I haven't seen HD. All my friends have it, my office has it, my neighbors have it, and I really don't care for it. I'm saying this though as a person who watches very little TV. 95% of my watching is with 24 hour news networks. The HD to me is very distracting because I'm almost always staring at someone's face (on these news networks) as they deliver the news or commentary. With HD one sees all the facial and skin imperfections, wrinkles in the clothes, etc. This stuff is barely noticeable with SD, thus, and much less distracting. Yes, I do watch an occasional movie, but it's generally just to kill time. If I'm serious about it, and want awesome resolution, I'll stream something from Netflix. Furthermore, almost everyone in my family is deaf or hard of hearing. That means we have the captions on 24/7. Captions on SD are almost always way better than captions provided by most digital HD services (not to mention that we aren't enjoying all the awesome background as we're more focused on reading the words). Look as I said in my original post, I don't want this to become a debate about HD vs SD. My liking of SD is just a personal preference based on my experiences with what, and how, I like to watch. Simple as that. To continue to pay a hundred bucks a month for, essentially, just news, I would like the kind of services I currently have and enjoy.

That said, I now understand what you are saying about possibly needing the 99 and 103 satellites in the future because they might start carrying programming that I watch. This is a very good point, and one that I haven't thought of previously. However, I just assume take my chances, and see how things go. If I'm forced to upgrade to something I don't like, then, luckily, there are many other options available to me.

As for the free upgrades, I expressed my concerns about the installer, and not wanting one, and was told they could mail me the boxes to me so I could have my guy install them. They were very understanding about this (probably because they were shocked I didn't want a DVR!). My neighbor, who is very handy, and seems to know a bit about this stuff (and is a DTV subscriber himself), says he will gladly swap out my dish for a Slimline with an SL3 or SL5. If he were to do that I wouldn't need to goof around with any of the wiring. The current wires could just be connected to 3 of the 4 ports just like they are now. Pretty simple (if I'm understanding it correctly. However, I'm kinda thinking I'll just wait and see what happens. Again, I could care less if my service goes away, and I have nothing but a blank screen come next April. I can then make a more educated decision as to what I'll do and where I'll go. At this point I'm just trying to understand what is going to happen and what technology I'll need to replace. I think I have a good handle on that now and sincerely appreciate all the input everyone has given me!


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

James, I almost mentioned exactly what you said about boats because my neighbor works on boats out here at Lake Mead (the HUGE lake that Hoover Dam creates), and he mentioned your point to me yesterday! He claims there is a good chance that the SDs will remain on 101 for two reasons (please understand that I'm just repeating, and NOT making this argument myself):

1) The 101 satellite can only rebroadcast a very limited number of HD channels whereas it was designed for SD channels and would be able to carry almost all the national channels in SD.

2) He also said there are a ton of boats at the marina who use DTV while boating. I'm not sure if he was referring to in motion service, but certainly while docked at the marinas, or while camped out at a beach for the weekend, etc. My neighbor claims (again I have no way to know if this is true or not as I just don't know the technology being used) that if DTV switches off SD channels then they will loose 99.99% of all of the marine and RV market. He claims in order to get DTV HD channels in a boat it costs over $10,000! However, SD channels can be had for less that $100, up to $600 (I think I'm remembering the numbers correctly).


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

Oh also he mentioned that streaming on the lake is impossible because there's only cell service at the marinas (not out on the water), and it's very weak (I can attest to that from the times I have been to the restaurants over there, VERY bad service). Furthermore, he says there is no WiFi anywhere on the water. If our big lake has these problems I can only imagine how bad it is at the thousands of small lakes around the country.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I have closed captioning on 99% of the time (I only turn it off when closed captioning is interfering with open captioning on the video). My biggest problem with SD is aspect ratio. So many channels have converted to HD and the SD feed becomes secondary. Either they letterbox their HD feed on the SD screen (making the picture smaller and creating a postage stamp (small picture with a border all the way around) when displayed on a 16x9 monitor) or they crop their HD feed and I don't get the whole picture. Zooming in the letterboxed picture is possible.

I suppose the letterbox/postage stamp effect gives more room for captions - and if you're listening or reading more that watching it doesn't matter how poor the background picture appears. I don't find the HD to be distracting. I do not notice "too much detail" in HD images. With open captions (subtitles) the extra resolution can me helpful.

Thany you for the antidotes about marine services. It is easy for people to forget services that they do not use are relied on by others. Including people forgetting the value of SD because they only watch HD.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Julie said:


> As for the free upgrades, I expressed my concerns about the installer, and not wanting one, and was told they could mail me the boxes to me so I could have my guy install them. They were very understanding about this (probably because they were shocked I didn't want a DVR!). My neighbor, who is very handy, and seems to know a bit about this stuff (and is a DTV subscriber himself), says he will gladly swap out my dish for a Slimline with an SL3 or SL5. If he were to do that I wouldn't need to goof around with any of the wiring. The current wires could just be connected to 3 of the 4 ports just like they are now. Pretty simple (if I'm understanding it correctly. However, I'm kinda thinking I'll just wait and see what happens. Again, I could care less if my service goes away, and I have nothing but a blank screen come next April. I can then make a more educated decision as to what I'll do and where I'll go. At this point I'm just trying to understand what is going to happen and what technology I'll need to replace. I think I have a good handle on that now and sincerely appreciate all the input everyone has given me!


Well the only gotcha is that they will probably not send you three H24s, which is what you'd need if you want to keep legacy mode. Even if they assure you they will send you three H24s, it is a crapshoot what you will get. Directv's system considers all H2x receivers to be the same, so they can't guarantee what model is sent to you even if the CSR tells you they can.

There isn't any reason they'd need to touch any of your wiring to upgrade you to SWM, but if you are worried that an installer might anyway your neighbor could install a SWM dish, splitter and power supply using your existing wiring. You'd have to provide those three things, but it sounds like you are OK with that if it means avoiding the risk of a Directv installer messing up your current wiring, screwing up your roof etc. But maybe you will get lucky and get three H24s, and you can hold out against SWM a little longer


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Yeah Julie ...

What slice and inkahauts say is true that if wiring changes are your only real concern about converting to a SWiM installation. Then you should have nothing to worry about.

For instance a neighbor of mine recently had an upgrade to an SL-5 from a P.III triple sat. dish connected to an outdoor mounted WB68 legacy multiswitch. And from what I can see the tech. simply removed the P. III, installed the new dish a few feet away. Swapped out the WB68 for an 8-way SWiM splitter.

And then assuredly placed a PI inside the home on the coax to power passing port on the splitter.

Job done from everything visble outside ...

Internal wiring not touched unless a cable was bad or there was a needed modification like for a different location of a receiver.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Julie said:


> James, I almost mentioned exactly what you said about boats because my neighbor works on boats out here at Lake Mead (the HUGE lake that Hoover Dam creates), and he mentioned your point to me yesterday! He claims there is a good chance that the SDs will remain on 101 for two reasons (please understand that I'm just repeating, and NOT making this argument myself):
> 
> 1) The 101 satellite can only rebroadcast a very limited number of HD channels whereas it was designed for SD channels and would be able to carry almost all the national channels in SD.
> 
> 2) He also said there are a ton of boats at the marina who use DTV while boating. I'm not sure if he was referring to in motion service, but certainly while docked at the marinas, or while camped out at a beach for the weekend, etc. My neighbor claims (again I have no way to know if this is true or not as I just don't know the technology being used) that if DTV switches off SD channels then they will loose 99.99% of all of the marine and RV market. He claims in order to get DTV HD channels in a boat it costs over $10,000! However, SD channels can be had for less that $100, up to $600 (I think I'm remembering the numbers correctly).


The boating guy doesn't seem to understand the sat tech. 101 isn't designed for SD more than Hi Definition or anything else. It's all bits to the satelite. There is a ton of bandwidth on 101 and they could move the core Hi Definition channels to there when they shut off the mpeg2 which is what I expect personally. Then the rest would be on the other satelites, but core would be only the most basic channels in the lowest packages, and if I am right, after they move the new satelite there anyway so they can mirror to PR easily. But we will see.

Either way he's mistaken about 101 being designed for SD and can only do a very limited amount of Hi Definition channels.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Julie said:


> James: Thanks, I understand about the no cost upgrade. Cost to me isn't super significant, I mean I'm already paying a hundred bucks a month for service I rarely use. I'm the type of person who would rather pay more for what I want than get a free upgrade for something that I'm lukewarm about.
> 
> Inkahauts: It's not that I haven't seen HD. All my friends have it, my office has it, my neighbors have it, and I really don't care for it. I'm saying this though as a person who watches very little TV. 95% of my watching is with 24 hour news networks. The HD to me is very distracting because I'm almost always staring at someone's face (on these news networks) as they deliver the news or commentary. With HD one sees all the facial and skin imperfections, wrinkles in the clothes, etc. This stuff is barely noticeable with SD, thus, and much less distracting. Yes, I do watch an occasional movie, but it's generally just to kill time. If I'm serious about it, and want awesome resolution, I'll stream something from Netflix. Furthermore, almost everyone in my family is deaf or hard of hearing. That means we have the captions on 24/7. Captions on SD are almost always way better than captions provided by most digital HD services (not to mention that we aren't enjoying all the awesome background as we're more focused on reading the words). Look as I said in my original post, I don't want this to become a debate about HD vs SD. My liking of SD is just a personal preference based on my experiences with what, and how, I like to watch. Simple as that. To continue to pay a hundred bucks a month for, essentially, just news, I would like the kind of services I currently have and enjoy.
> 
> ...


Well, as others have said, piece of mind is important here I can tell, and I must say you are worried about the wiring when there's no need to be. If your neighbor will do it, I'd go for it right now. Hooking up the splitter and the new dish and the power inverter is a cake walk and he won't even be touching your wiring through the house. The only thing he even needs to know is which wire goes to which room which is very easy to figure out.

I just can't see upgrading to old equipment that isn't installed anymore for residential customers. Not when there is no technical reasoning for it, and the amount of work required is basically the exact same.

Just another FYI...With that said, your comment of letting your service go dark, To see what else is out there then, we'll, the offer of what can replace your equipment will not change, not unless you are considering moving to a DVR system at some point. The non DVR stuff that's out today isn't changing between now and then, and likely not ever again based on what they have been doing... so there is no real reason to wait on DIRECTV to see what else might be available.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Either way he's mistaken about 101 being designed for SD and can only do a very limited amount of Hi Definition channels.


The issue is not 101 being designed for SD but the antennas commonly used for in motion being designed for ku band DBS/DSS - NOT ka band. Stationary antennas are easier to find (and cheaper). If AT&T|DIRECTV requires every in motion customer to buy a replacement antenna expect that most will simply keep their old ku antennas and change to a different service.

DIRECTV will not be able to fit their entire HD lineup on 101. Read that as a limit on the number of HD channels that can be placed at 101. If they do manage to cram their entire HD lineup on 101 it won't be the same level of HD that they have on the ka satellites. There simply is not the bandwidth to mirror everything to 101 ("core channels only" is a limit).


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> DIRECTV will not be able to fit their entire HD lineup on 101. Read that as a limit on the number of HD channels that can be placed at 101. If they do manage to cram their entire HD lineup on 101 it won't be the same level of HD that they have on the ka satellites. There simply is not the bandwidth to mirror everything to 101 ("core channels only" is a limit).


And that's where the potential option of "mirror everything in MPEG4 SD" would come from. There definitely IS bandwidth sufficient for that, and it isn't like they have any use for all the bandwidth that would be freed up on 99/103 if they moved a bunch of HD channels to 101.

I mean, they could increase the bandwidth (i.e. quality) of all their HD channels if they moved some of their HD channels to 101, but would they gain more customers from a quality improvement than they'd lose from boat and RV customers leaving for Dish? I doubt it.


----------



## doctor j (Jun 14, 2006)

Go to gct's SAT/TPN/Channel grids and actually look at what is on SAT 101.
All the CINE/ MUSIC / SPORTS channels could be on 99/103. Probably all the Infomercial and Shopping Channels as well.
We know for certain that MPEG 4 Ku HD can do 4 Channels per TPN as is seen on 119 TPN 24 with 4 Spanish HD channels in use.

There are 26 CONUS TPNs on 101 at present with 6 "Spot Beams" I'd have to dig deep in old FCC postings to see if D9s (all even TPNs ) could be reconfigured to TX all 16 as CONUS but pretty certain D15 if moved or D16 yet to be seen can do all 32 CONUS.

At a minimum that gives 26 x 4 = *104* Ku HD Channel bandwidth on 101.

If bonding/ better compression/ enhanced FEC could get to 5 Ku HD/TPN and all 32 available.
The math becomes 32 x 5 =*160*

That will get everything anyone considers "Core Channels" with room to spare.

Doctor j


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bonding isn't an option, older receivers wouldn't support it - I think Directv must be planning to do it with software, the CPU in the H2x/HR2x wouldn't be up to the task. You need DVB-S2X to do the bonding in hardware.

They could fit a lot of stuff on 101, but what can they do with all the bandwidth freed up on 99/103? I guess it comes down to, would boat/RV subscribers who can only receive 101 for various reasons rather have a limited selection of channels that are in HD, or have a full selection of all channels but in SD (but hey at least higher quality SD than what Directv has now)


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

If D15 or the prospective D16 were moved to 101W they could certainly transmit all of the 32 DBS tp. frequencies on CONUS beams and spot mirrors to PR and Hawaii.

But for the current D9S there?

Nah ... no real need to waste the effort digging through the FCC files dr. j.

Except for the useless option of being able to add odd DBS tp. ch. 27 as a CONUS beam downlink tp. (and sacrificing one of the 22 spotbeam uplink channels from either the LABC or CRBC in the process).

D9S can't add any more than the present 10 even numbered CONUS beam tps.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

doctor j said:


> Go to gct's SAT/TPN/Channel grids and actually look at what is on SAT 101.
> All the CINE/ MUSIC / SPORTS channels could be on 99/103. Probably all the Infomercial and Shopping Channels as well.
> We know for certain that MPEG 4 Ku HD can do 4 Channels per TPN as is seen on 119 TPN 24 with 4 Spanish HD channels in use.
> 
> ...


Why is DIRECTV limited to 4 HD Ku band channels while Dish does 7 IIRC on their Ku transponder?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

RAD said:


> Why is DIRECTV limited to 4 HD Ku band channels while Dish does 7 IIRC on their Ku transponder?


DIRECTV cares about quality.  BTW: DISH now has transponders with 10 HD channels. Newer compression schemes help fit more into less space, but it is hard to ignore that number. (Especially remembering when DISH had 13 MPEG2 SD channels per transponder. Are modern encoders that much better than MPEG2?)


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

minimonster17 said:


> Changing gears slightly here, but will 119 still be used to house the Spanish channels after the 2019 drop? Or will they be migrated to the other satellites, or something else? I currently have a Slimline 5 Reverse Band Dish with the Choice w/ En Espanol package, and am wondering how the Spanish channels will be affected by the changeover.


With 119W scheduled to go dark next year, all CONUS beam programming there on tps. 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 30, and 32 will have to be moved somewhere on the core 99-101-103W group.

Where exactly on the group cannot be known at this time. But for all those like you with all HD MPEG-4 capable receivers and the Slimline dish should not be affected and the transition is seamless.

(Though now both the 110 and 119W receive feedhorns and associated circuitry in the LNB will be useless now of course.)

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

James Long said:


> DIRECTV cares about quality.  BTW: DISH now has transponders with 10 HD channels. Newer compression schemes help fit more into less space, but it is hard to ignore that number. (Especially remembering when DISH had 13 MPEG2 SD channels per transponder. Are modern encoders that much better than MPEG2?)


Has it been confirmed that DISH no longer down-converts their 1080i HD feeds to 1440 x 1080 to help reach such high numbers like that of as many as 10 HD channels on a tp.?

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## DirectMan (Jul 15, 2007)

I have an owned D12-700. Does anyone think that DIRECTV will offer to swap that receiver for an owned H24 or equivalent?


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

Slice1900: Thanks for the heads-up about them probably not sending me three H24s.

Inkahauts: Why would they need to know which wire goes to what room for the SWM installation? It seems to me that if I can get the H24s which are also SWM compatible (as was told to me here), the only piece of outdated hardware would be the SL3 since the dish, according to Solid Signal, is physically the same. I get that you think that the conversion from my Phase III to the SWM Slimline setup is a “cake walk” but that might not be so! Right now I have three wires from the dish directly to each receiver (my installer calls them “home runs”). It’s my understanding (from reading the Solid Signal white paper) that SWM dish gets connected directly to the power inserter which is an indoor unit, no? So that means that a wire would need to be run from the indoor power inserter to the dish. Then if I don’t want my current home runs shortened, I would need yet another wire from the power inserter back toward the dish to the splitter which would connect to the three wires already up there. Then there is the issue of if the 4 position splitter would even fit into the arm of the dish and keep all the connections out of the weather (as they are now). I don’t think it’s quite as simple as originally thought.

As for waiting till things go dark, I think you misunderstood me. I’m not saying I’ll wait to see what else is available from DTV (other than waiting to see if there are MPEG4 SD channels on 101), I meant other options like, DISH, Cox cable, Hulu, other streaming services, etc. Again, I’m far from a TV junkie so the down time isn’t critical, and there wouldn’t be a large pull for me to stay with DIRECTV if they don’t have SD channels after next April. I’ve been a subscriber since the 90s, and have continued to pay the hundred bucks a month, instead of looking elsewhere for cheaper services, because I got what I wanted from them, and it remained convenient. However, no SD channels means that I won’t get what I want, and there’s a bit of a hassle to convert so there’s really no reason to hang around. At that point I would probably bow out and let the rest of the world enjoying HD have at it!

In regard to my neighbor, “the boating guy”, I think the problem was with me conveying what he was saying, and not his knowledge. He was saying DTV could put all of the SD channels on 101 whereas if they put HD channels on there they couldn’t fit all of them. As James said “core channels only is a limit.” Thus, it seems as though the boating dude is correct.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

DirectMan said:


> I have an owned D12-700. Does anyone think that DIRECTV will offer to swap that receiver for an owned H24 or equivalent?


As free "replacement" (not swap) yes, likely for an H25. But no, sorry it won't be owned...

Lease only ....

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

James: You’re welcome for the antidotes, and thank you for all the assistance!

While I’m at it I’ll mention that today I contacted a close friend who is a big time boater, and has his boat at the marina. He told me he has DTV on their boat, and that it’s his estimation is that 9 out of every 10 satellite subscribers on the lake use DTV instead of DISH. I was floored!

He explained that one can use his antenna (which gets a single satellite at a time) to get either DISH in HD, or DIRECTV in SD. Now I was really confused!! So I asked why only 1 in 10 would use DISH and he explained that on a boat they are just happy to have satellite radio and satellite TV out there. Most of the boats don’t even have HD TVs and without the satellite radio and satellite TV options there would be no radio or TV on most of the lake.

Furthermore, and this is where it gets really interesting, he said that he used to have a DISH account but cancelled it as soon as was possible because they split their channels between two different satellites (I assume he meant HD like DTV does, but I’m not sure). Thus, when he would change from one channel to the next, there was a good possibility that it was on the other satellite and it would take about 4 seconds of the antenna grinding away to lock onto the other satellite. He said the lag doesn’t sound like much, but he constantly flips back and forth during commercials, or between games, and he said the delay was driving him “insane” (his word). He explained that he does have HD TVs on his boat, but loves DIRECTV simply because once it locks onto 101, he can flip through as many SD channels as he likes, and the antenna never needs to reposition. Additionally, he said that on a boat reserve power is a large concern so he can even kill power to antenna after it locks onto 101, and he’s good for as long as he’s in the same spot (which for him is usually 2 to 3 days at a time).


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

As I was typing my last post something occurred to me that I don’t understand. If the companies that make these automatic antennas for the boats and RVs can make it so it switches between two DISH satellites as needed. Why can’t they make it so they switch between DTV’s 99 and 103 sats? Of course there would still be the 4 second delay that my friend mentioned to search and lock, but the technology should be the same, no?

My neighbor claims there is no such antenna for boats or RVs that will get DTV’s HD channels under $10,000. For regular priced antennas, it’s only 101 for DTV, that’s it. Why would this be?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Hi Julie ...

I still don't think you quite understand a SWiM installation.

The "Power Inserter" (or "PI") connects between a receiver and one of your coax runs back to the dish to send DC power up the center conductor of the coax. The other end of the coax at the dish then connects to the "power-pass" port on the SWiM splitter (a "4-way" type with one port capped off for your situation). 

Which allows the DC power from the PI to pass through the splitter from output to input and then on to the LNB to power it.

The SWiM splitter does not mount inside the dish's LNB support arm, but can be placed anywhere near the dish and is weatherproof.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## Julie (Sep 28, 2013)

Oh, ok, yeah I see I was way off. So I would only need two extra pieces of cable (one from the PI to a receiver) and the other from the power pass port of the splitter to the dish. So the reason why he would need to know which cable went to which receiver is to identify which one has the PI connected to it. I think I finally got it, but still like the idea of using a legacy SL-3 for now (should I move forward).


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

James Long said:


> The issue is not 101 being designed for SD but the antennas commonly used for in motion being designed for ku band DBS/DSS - NOT ka band. Stationary antennas are easier to find (and cheaper). If AT&T|DIRECTV requires every in motion customer to buy a replacement antenna expect that most will simply keep their old ku antennas and change to a different service.
> 
> DIRECTV will not be able to fit their entire HD lineup on 101. Read that as a limit on the number of HD channels that can be placed at 101. If they do manage to cram their entire HD lineup on 101 it won't be the same level of HD that they have on the ka satellites. There simply is not the bandwidth to mirror everything to 101 ("core channels only" is a limit).


Of course...

The reason for wanting core on 101 is for mobile, and using a new sat that gets rid of spots would allow them even more space their... I see no reason why all the channels in the lowest package or even second lowest won't fit at 101. Maybe even one main channel from each of the premiums. And then have the other channels where they are now.

A limit yes, but not a deal breaker, who else can supply them channels? And the way she worded it, I just wanted to make sure it's understood that the 101 satelites can do the same things as any other location physically in terms of what kinds of channels they can carry. It's the reception end for moving vehicles that a different animal.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Julie said:


> As I was typing my last post something occurred to me that I don't understand. If the companies that make these automatic antennas for the boats and RVs can make it so it switches between two DISH satellites as needed. Why can't they make it so they switch between DTV's 99 and 103 sats? Of course there would still be the 4 second delay that my friend mentioned to search and lock, but the technology should be the same, no?
> 
> My neighbor claims there is no such antenna for boats or RVs that will get DTV's HD channels under $10,000. For regular priced antennas, it's only 101 for DTV, that's it. Why would this be?


Well, it's a bit technical ...

But to try and simplify, the DIRECTV satellites at the 99 and 103W operate on Ka band frequencies which are much higher and have shorter wavelengths than the lower frequency/longer wavelength Ku band used by the satellites at 101, 110, and 119W.

This produces much sharper and narrower radio beam peaks on the earth for the Ka band requiring much more pricise alignment of the customer receiving dish than for the Ku band reception. Therefore an "in-motion" receiving dish system needs a very acurrate satellite signal tracking and dish positioning system as the ship moves, plus compensate for the pitching and rolling of the ship at the same time.

Needless to say this along with low volume production drives up the cost tremendously.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> With 119W scheduled to go dark next year, all CONUS beam programming there on tps. 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 30, and 32 will have to be moved somewhere on the core 99-101-103W group.
> 
> Where exactly on the group cannot be known at this time. But for all those like you with all HD MPEG-4 capable receivers and the Slimline dish should not be affected and the transition is seamless.
> 
> ...


I've still not seen anything that 119 is going dark. I suspect it will be kept in service for PR.

And don't forget that 97 stuff needs a new home, but I suspect it already has one on 99 or 103 RBS... they could do the same to all foreign stuff requiring rRBS lnbs... if it was once on 119 or 97...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Julie said:


> Oh, ok, yeah I see I was way off. So I would only need two extra pieces of cable (one from the PI to a receiver) and the other from the power pass port of the splitter to the dish. So the reason why he would need to know which cable went to which receiver is to identify which one has the PI connected to it. I think I finally got it, but still like the idea of using a legacy SL-3 for now (should I move forward).


Closer but not quite sure you understand the exact hookup yet, as your wording makes me think you still aren't clear on the splitter connection. let me see if I can make it clearer just cause...

Run a coax From the lnb on the dish to the input on a splitter. Splitter can be mounted right next to the dish so it's a very short cable.

Your three home run lines get connected to the output of the splitter. On one of the outputs from the splitter the port is red, which is the power pas port. The cable connected to that port is the line that gets the pi in the house. The power pass port is out from the splitter towards the receiver. And then as you said from the wall tot he pi, then from the pi to a receiver.

It's simple to install.. and the splitter has weather boots on them to protect the connections from the weather...


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

inkahauts said:


> RBS





inkahauts said:


> rRBS lnbs


what is that ?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Julie said:


> If the companies that make these automatic antennas for the boats and RVs can make it so it switches between two DISH satellites as needed. Why can't they make it so they switch between DTV's 99 and 103 sats?





HoTat2 said:


> But to try and simplify, the DIRECTV satellites at the 99 and 103W operate on Ka band frequencies which are much higher and have shorter wavelengths than the lower frequency/longer wavelength Ku band used by the satellites at 101, 110, and 119W.


Julie, as an oversimplification think of "ku" as FM and "ka" as AM. All of DISH's satellites and DIRECTV's 101 are FM. DIRECTV's 99 and 103 are AM. Nearly all of the in motion antennas are designed for "ku" (FM in the simplification). They do not receive "ka" (AM in the simplification). And as HoTat2 accurately explains, the market for in motion antennas that can receive "ka" is smaller - pushing the price up for mass production.


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

According to Winegard, it's not just the "in motion" units that will have issues with mpeg4, but the stationary domed carryout's that many RV'ers use as well. I inquired about those directly with Winegard and this is their response to me. I also find it very interesting that as a major partner of DirecTV, especially in the RV world, they say they aren't privy to DirecTV's plans...….

" Winegard does not have information regarding an MPEG4 conversion by DirecTV. However, our Carryout units and in fact all of our dome units are not MPEG4 compatible. The Trav'ler is the only unit capable of using MPEG4 signals.…"


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

It's don't make sense using a key word from VIDEO compression algos [MPEG-2/4/etc] for such pure RF part of DTV chain as antennae/dish ! Are they technically impaired ?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> It's don't make sense using a key word from VIDEO compression algos [MPEG-2/4/etc] for such pure RF part of DTV chain as antennae/dish ! Are they technically impaired ?


Well actually P. Smith, as I once posted before either here or on another thread, I don't recall.

It does make sense if by "MPEG-4" Winegard tech. support means capable of receiving DIRECTV Ka band service from 99 and 103W, which is all in MPEG-4 AVC format of course.

It's loose and technically inaccurate to refer to it that way of course. But I've nevertheless heard many still do it.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

In fact even I just used a bit of technically inaccurate terminology by referring to the Ka band service as being in " 'all' MPEG-4 AVC format," which is not completely true.

Since DIRECTV's 4K programming is on the Ka band, but in "HEVC" format of course ... 

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

You should know Ka band is using for DTV "A3" type of signaling/coding/modulations/etc what include a bunch of new technology: DVB-S2, AMC, MPEG-4 aka H.264, HEVC aka H.265 plus audio AAC … perhaps more what we don't aware … yet.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> But I've nevertheless heard many still do it.


because you, me and others go for low denominator, giving low hanging fruit to uneducated masses 

instead of educate each time when we see such "pearls" in posts or OMG in technical data from companies like mentioned above


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

you should remember when Reverse Band came, how many attempts was to twist it 
seems to me it's become unified for each one here

"Knowledge is power" ! F.Bacon


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> It does make sense if by "MPEG-4" Winegard tech. support means capable of receiving DIRECTV Ka band service from 99 and 103W, which is all in MPEG-4 AVC format of course.


I assume that the tech is saying that the antenna will not work with DIRECTV's MPEG4 service as currently delivered. The simplification fails when stated "our Carryout units and in fact all of our dome units are not MPEG4 compatible." Those units work fine delivering MPEG4 HD from DISH - so the statement "not MPEG4 compatible" is proven not true.

I do not mind a simplification (less detail) if it is accurate. In this case the simplification becomes inaccurate.
Their website has simplified capabilities without becoming inaccurate.
Winegard RV Antennas: Satellite, HDTV, WiFi & 4G LTE

(Sometimes answers can be so accurate that no one who did not already know the answer can understand what was said. Accurate simplification helps.)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> In fact even I just used a bit of technically inaccurate terminology by referring to the Ka band service as being in " 'all' MPEG-4 AVC format," which is not completely true.
> 
> Since DIRECTV's 4K programming is on the Ka band, but in "HEVC" format of course ...
> 
> Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


And it is possible there may still be a bit of MPEG2, since they will need to leave some DSS transponders place (well, at least one) and it isn't certain there isn't some limitation with DSS that prevents it from carrying MPEG4 channels. Might just be stuff like test/music channels where the video content is minimal, but still...


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Understood P. Smith ...

But it's kinda hard when the official terminology from DIRECTV themselves are probably the biggest offender is this area ..

For instance ...

The "Ka band," ... when the truth is only the uplink side from the broadcast centers actually operate on the Ka band proper between 27-40 GHz. With the downlink side actually on the lower "K-band" between 18-27 GHz? (According to the IEEE freq. band std.)

"4K dishes or LNBs," ... when the reality is the broadcast picture resolution standard has absolutely nothing to do with the receiving dish or LNB?

"MPEG-4 only local markets," when it should more accurately be called "K-band only" local markets?

Listening to the DIRECTV reps. to Arianespace at the time regularly refer to the Reverse DBS band as "R-band" throughout the preparation and launch of D14 and D15?

This kind of stuff ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I wouldn't take those mistakenly using acronyms from any company and begin spread it here; that would devaluate our common wisdom and discard all knowledge accrued here 

I'm all for correct using the wording and continue explain to all members who don't know all tidbits...


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

P Smith said:


> you should remember when Reverse Band came, how many attempts was to twist it
> seems to me it's become unified for each one here
> 
> "Knowledge is power" ! F.Bacon


The named definitions for the commonly used satellite tv frequencies are defined in The Federal Register, Title 47, Part 25, Subpart A, 25.103

*Conventional C-band*. The 3700-4200 MHz (space-to-Earth) and 5925-6425 MHz (Earth-to-space) FSS frequency bands

*Conventional Ka-band*. The 18.3-18.8 GHz (space-to-Earth), 19.7-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth), 28.35-28.6 GHz (Earth-to-space), and 29.25-30.0 GHz (Earth-to-space) frequency bands, which the Commission has designated as primary for GSO FSS operation.

*Conventional Ku-band*. The 11.7-12.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 14.0-14.5 GHz (Earth-to-space) FSS frequency bands.

*Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) Service*. A radiocommunication service in which signals transmitted or retransmitted by Broadcasting-Satellite Service space stations in the 12.2-12.7 GHz band are intended for direct reception by subscribers or the general public. For the purposes of this definition, the term direct reception includes individual reception and community reception.

*17/24 GHz Broadcasting-Satellite Service (17/24 GHz BSS)*. A radiocommunication service involving transmission from one or more feeder-link earth stations to other earth stations via geostationary satellites, in the 17.3-17.7 GHz (space-to-Earth) (domestic allocation), 17.3-17.8 GHz (space-to-Earth) (international allocation) and 24.75-25.25 GHz (Earth-to-space) bands. For purposes of the application processing provisions of this part, the 17/24 GHz BSS is a GSO-like service. Unless specifically stated otherwise, 17/24 GHz BSS systems are subject to the rules in this part applicable to FSS.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Say if they do get rid of all SD channels and not even have MPEG 4 SD channels, would they want to waist HD bandwidth and have an HD channel that would only have SD programing? I was thinking about that since a lot of those classic TV show sub-channels only show those classic TV shows in SD. I keep forgetting that the local TV sub-channels are mainly in SD. Then I can forget about DTV even airing the national feeds of the popular classic TV show sub-channels. Does that make sense?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> Say if they do get rid of all SD channels and not even have MPEG 4 SD channels, would they want to waist HD bandwidth and have an HD channel that would only have SD programing? I was thinking about that since a lot of those classic TV show sub-channels only show those classic TV shows in SD. I keep forgetting that the local TV sub-channels are mainly in SD. Then I can forget about DTV even airing the national feeds of the popular classic TV show sub-channels. Does that make sense?


Won't happen, so not worth worrying about.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> Won't happen, so not worth worrying about.


Not doing MPEG 4 SD or DTV ever getting the national feeds of the classic TV sub-channels?


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

CraigerM said:


> Not doing MPEG 4 SD or DTV ever getting the national feeds of the classic TV sub-channels?


_If_ they never pick up national feeds of the various subchannels, the reason will _not_ be because those channels broadcast primarily SD programming.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> Not doing MPEG 4 SD or DTV ever getting the national feeds of the classic TV sub-channels?


They aren't going to carry "all" channels in HD by upconverting SD channels to HD. They will carry SD channels in SD, same as today.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> They aren't going to carry "all" channels in HD by upconverting SD channels to HD. They will carry SD channels in SD, same as today.


I didn't mean all channels just upconverting the classic TV sub-channel national feeds from an SD channel to an HD channel. So that's good to know they would just use the MPEG 4 SD channels for SD duplicates, if they did do that and not use some of the MPEG 4 SD channels for upconverting the classic TV sub-channels from an SD channel to an HD channel.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

MPEG4 does NOT mean it has to be in HD. We actually already have MPEG4-SD channels right now, a bunch of the P/I channels and several SD only locals for the non-101 markets. (Along with most of Puerto Rico's stations)

They don't need to upconvert anything. In the extremely rare chance they pick them up, they'll just be carried as MPEG4-SD channels. And in the even rarer chance any of them get picked up before the actual MPEG2 shutdown, they'll initially be carried as MPEG2/SD channels.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> They aren't going to carry "all" channels in HD by upconverting SD channels to HD. They will carry SD channels in SD, same as today.





CraigerM said:


> I didn't mean all channels just upconverting the classic TV sub-channel national feeds from an SD channel to an HD channel.


They will carry SD channels in SD, same as today (although with all receivers capable of viewing MPEG4 they can convert MPEG2 SD channels to MPEG4 SD and save satellite space).



CraigerM said:


> So that's good to know they would just use the MPEG 4 SD channels for SD duplicates, ...


No. SD will continue to be used for SD only channels, not just SD duplicates of HD channels.

There are some people predicting that SD duplicates of HD will go away. Right now that is a matter of opinion since DIRECTV has not announced their plans to continue or discontinue those duplicates.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

What also made me think of asking that question was I saw that UVerseTV has METV and Heroes and Icons on both HD and a SD channel.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

They're not upconverting them, they both have HD feeds. In many markets where MeTV is on a primary channel, it broadcasts in HD, the same with the few OTA markets like Seattle that has H&I on a primary channel.

In the rare chance DirecTV does pick them up, they'll likely have to agree to the same terms Dish and some other providers do. Where the national feed isn't available at all in markets where MeTV is on a primary channel. Including your market St Louis where it's locally available on channel 24.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

KyL416 said:


> They're not upconverting them, they both have HD feeds. In many markets where MeTV is on a primary channel, it broadcasts in HD, the same with the few OTA markets like Seattle that has H&I on a primary channel.
> 
> In the rare chance DirecTV does pick them up, they'll likely have to agree to the same terms Dish and some other providers do. Where the channel isn't available at all in markets where MeTV is on a primary channel. Including your market St Louis where it's locally available on channel 24.


Aren't they just using the national feeds of METV and Heroes and Icons on channels 136/1136 and 137/1137? On Dish Network its 247. I have seen on some people posting in the AT&T forums they get both their local feed of METV and METV on 136/1136. I also saw on METV's Wikipedia page it says 1080i but its downgraded to 480i for most OTA affiliates. METV used to be on 136/1136 and it did move to 24 and 1024 on UVerseTV in my area. On DirecTV its just channel 24.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Wikipedia says a lot of things that should be taken with a grain of salt. On subchannel affiliates it's downcoverted to 480i, but markets that get it on a primary channel like LA, NYC, Philly, Seattle, Chicago and St Louis get it in 720p. It's the same with H&I, although only a few markets have them as a primary channel.

It moved to 24 in your area because Weigel, MeTV's owner, purchased KNLC at the end of 2017, and switched KNLC's programming to MeTV on February 1st. Since Weigel owns the station, you probably can also stream it online for free with MeTV's app since the live stream is available in MeTV O&O markets.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

KyL416 said:


> Wikipedia says a lot of things that should be taken with a grain of salt. On subchannel affiliates it's downcoverted to 480i, but markets that get it on a primary channel like *LA, *NYC, Philly, Seattle, Chicago and St Louis get it in 720p. *It's the same with H&I, although only a few markets have them as a primary channel.*
> ....


Well unfortunately it's currently a case of "yes" and "no" to the first here and "no" to the second for the LA market at least Kyle.

While the MeTV outlet KAZA 54-1 (now in a CSA with KHTV-CD 27) is in 720p HD. During a recent phone conversation I had with the station tech. manager about resolving another issue. He mentioned to me that they're actually broadcasting MeTV in upconverted SD.

And as for H&I now on KVME 20-1 in Bishop, CA. While I obviously can't receive their OTA signal from my location here in So. LA to know for sure what format they're broadcasting (although Rabbitears reports it as just 480i SD).

It's carried by DIRECTV only in SD.

And rather annoyingly too, since like the previous MeTV network programming carried by that station. The 16:9 AR format of the H&I network programs are again anamorphically squeezed into 4:3 (or "squish-o-vision").

But since I can't receive KVME off-air, in fairness it's propably DIRECTV actually doing this since they broadcast all MPEG-2 SD only in 4:3 format anyway.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I wonder if another way to look at it if DTV did not even do MPEG 4 SD channels would they carry any channels that would have SD only programming anyway? Would DTV want to waste any of their HD channel bandwidth on channels that carry SD only programming?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

SD isn't going anywhere, so stop fixating on this idea of them dropping SD entirely:
- P/I channels they have to carry to fulfil a quota
- Channels paying for their place on the lineup (Some of which also don't have HD feeds like FETV and some of the lesser shopping channels)
- Channels like Boomerang, CNBC World and MTV Classic who have no plans to go HD (i.e. HD Music videos didn't even become a widespread thing until the late 00s)
- Tons of Latino and International channels that have no HD feeds available at all (including the national feed of Telemundo which NBCU has yet to make available in HD)

And stop fixating on this idea of "wasting" HD bandwidth or them running out of room in general. The MPEG4/SD content they do carry are scattered across transponders, dropping them wouldn't free up any space for any additional HD channels on their transponders. It's like the bogus claims people made about the MusicChoice channels taking up space, even though there are no more than 4 to a transponder, so getting rid of them wouldn't even add up to the bandwidth needed for one SD channel. They have more than enough bandwidth to keep SD only channels, and even MPEG4/SD duplicates if they want to, especially after the 4K moves to reverse band and D15 moves back to the 103 slot.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

KyL416 said:


> SD isn't going anywhere, so stop fixating on this idea of them dropping SD entirely:
> - P/I channels they have to carry to fulfil a quota
> - Channels paying for their place on the lineup (Some of which also don't have HD feeds like FETV and some of the lesser shopping channels)
> - Channels like Boomerang, CNBC World and MTV Classic who have no plans to go HD (i.e. HD Music videos didn't even become a widespread thing until the late 00s)
> ...


Ok, sorry. Just curious how many channels could DirecTV add?


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

KyL416 said:


> It's like the bogus claims people made about the MusicChoice channels taking up space


Do you think they will eventually move the MusicChoice channels from 119 to 101?


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

TheRatPatrol said:


> Do you think they will eventually move the MusicChoice channels from 119 to 101?


Since they are getting rid of 119, yes.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

CraigerM said:


> Would DTV want *to waste* any of their HD channel bandwidth on channels that carry SD only programming?


it will go opposite direction, as SD compressed by H.264 [MPEG-4] will take LESS bandwidth then the same SD in H.262 [MPEG-2]


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Does anyone else want to scream "ALL SD IS NOT GOING AWAY" as much as I want to?

Since day one it has been made clear that the end of MPEG2 SD does NOT mean everything will be in HD. It has been said over and over again.
DIRECTV certainly will not be upconverting SD to HD (although they will have space for higher quality MPEG4 SD than they currently have in MPEG2 SD).


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

if I would scream here, I would do:
"*ONLY MPEG-2 video compression will be CEASED !!!*"


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

James Long said:


> Does anyone else want to scream "ALL SD IS NOT GOING AWAY" as much as I want to?
> 
> Since day one it has been made clear that the end of MPEG2 SD does NOT mean everything will be in HD. It has been said over and over again.
> DIRECTV certainly will not be upconverting SD to HD (although they will have space for higher quality MPEG4 SD than they currently have in MPEG2 SD).





P Smith said:


> if I would scream here, I would do:
> "*ONLY MPEG-2 video compression will be CEASED !!!*"


Some people are like puppies. First you have to show them the stick. Then you can throw it.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I said I was sorry,  I don't mean to make people scream.  I don't why I didn't think they could still have SD channels that don't have an HD version of it, if they don't have any SD duplicates.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> Ok, sorry. Just curious how many channels could DirecTV add?


Three transponders are currently carrying 4K programs, those will eventually move to reverse band. Eight transponders will become available at some point, when D15 moves back to 103 (it is going on a little vacation to 101 until Directv gets T16 launched, which they apparently are planning to happen sometime next year)

11 transponders is room for about 60 HD channels. That doesn't even count whatever additional space they might have with transponders that aren't filled up, or other transponders that might be idle. They will never run out of bandwidth for HD, no matter how many more SD only channels convert to HD, even if they end up using 101 for MPEG4 SD mirrors of everything.


----------



## GoLongAndChopChop881 (Dec 20, 2017)

P Smith said:


> if I would scream here, I would do:
> "*ONLY MPEG-2 video compression will be CEASED !!!*"


If Comcast is doing for smaller cable companies, but don't worry.

*WE HAVE Headend In The Sky (HITS) THAT TRANSMITS MPEG-2 CONTENT IN SD AND HD TO SAVE MORE BANDWIDTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HITS MPEG-2 Content Delivery | Comcast Technology Solutions*


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We're talking about DIRECTV ... MPEG2 is not ceasing worldwide.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

GoLongAndChopChop881 said:


> TRANSMITS MPEG-2 CONTENT IN SD AND HD TO SAVE MORE BANDWIDTH


BS !
MPEG-4 eg H.264 doing it for SD/HD stream better then MPEG.2/H.262 !


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

Just read this this am on an RV site about what DirecTV plans for SD replacements at 101. Poster says it is from a leaked internal memo to TracVision dealers about what is to come.

Here is the link to the post...

"Official" announcement of DirecTV 2019 changes - iRV2 Forums


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

so will they lock some stuff to 101? or flex feeds around like they now often


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

this is kind of question what only DTV could answer … so, don't expect get something factual and real - only speculations. eg look back to posts here


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

grover517 said:


> Just read this this am on an RV site about what DirecTV plans for SD replacements at 101. Poster says it is from a leaked internal memo to TracVision dealers about what is to come.
> 
> Here is the link to the post...
> 
> "Official" announcement of DirecTV 2019 changes - iRV2 Forums


Hey thanks for this find ...

If accurate, and there appears no reason to doubt it, looks like inkahaut's position is the correct one.

101W will carry a subset of the most "popularly veiwed" HD channels most assuredly in MPEG-4/8-PSK, moved over from the Ka-band.

In that document though, not sure what becomes of 110 and 119W.

Possibly reorient 110W to place its beam back over CONUS (since PR can see 101W now with T15 or eventually the upcoming T16 there now) and then have 110 and 119W "mirror" the remaining "less popular" HD channels from 99/103W so the RV/Boating/carryout Ku DBS only systems won't lose channels in this transition?

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

JoeTheDragon said:


> so will they lock some stuff to 101? or flex feeds around like they now often


What do you mean by flex feeds around?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

grover517 said:


> Just read this this am on an RV site about what DirecTV plans for SD replacements at 101. Poster says it is from a leaked internal memo to TracVision dealers about what is to come.
> Here is the link to the post...
> 
> "Official" announcement of DirecTV 2019 changes - iRV2 Forums


Very good find ... and I am glad that he included the leaked document in his post (every interpretation adds ambiguity). Unfortunately the memo still refers to SD (not MPEG2 SD) so hopefully KVH understands what they wrote.



> DIRECTV/AT&T will be ending Standard Definition (SD) television transmissions from the 101W and 119W satellites in mid-2019. At that time, SD transmissions originating from the 101W orbital slot will be converted to high-definition (HD) format, and SD transmissions originating from the 119W satellite will be terminated.
> 
> DIRECTV has not yet identified the specific channel listing that will be available from the 101W or 119W satellites once the transition is completed. KVH anticipates popular national channels such as CNN, ESPN, etc., will be available in HD on 101W, but we have not received confirmation. DIRECTV is currently sending out notifications to customers that DIRECTV equipment needs to be updated, and that they will upgrade the equipment for free to HD compatible components.


"DIRECTV has not yet identified the specific channel listing that will be available from the 101W or 119W satellites once the transition is completed." This tells us that (as of the memo) DIRECTV is keeping 119 active and will use it after the "SD termination". Having 101 and 119 available helps improve the number of channels that could be provided.



> The changes DIRECTV/AT&T are implementing require that HD-compatible receivers be installed. The approved HD receivers that are compatible with KVH products are the H24, HR24 and H25 models.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

That writeup says NOTHING about continuing to use 119, so I will go with Stuart who said Directv specifically told dealers that 119 was going away. It says "_At that time, SD transmissions originating from the 101W orbital slot will be converted to high-definition (HD) format, and SD transmissions originating from the 119W satellite will be terminated." _If 119 was going to broadcast HD channels, it wouldn't have said different things for 101 & 119. I think the next line is just a KVH misunderstanding, there will be no 119 after next summer.

Keeping 119 around makes no sense. It would only add 7 CONUS transponders, and only has a couple years of remaining life at best (back in 2014 Directv renewed its license for 7 years until 2021) AT&T sure as hell won't pay to launch a new satellite for the convenience of the small minority of RV customers who have a dish that can receive 119 (especially since RV customers are already a small minority of Directv customers) What's the point of adding 7 transponders worth of channels, there will still be some channels they can't get. There's ZERO chance that 110 sticks around. In fact, I'll bet it is gone before the end of the year, and that's why the rush to move T15 to 101 since T16 wasn't going to launch in time.

But great find, now we finally know what the plans are. What I wonder now is how many channels they will carry on 101. If they really crammed them in they could upwards of 150, but I don't see the point of doing that - they would have tons of Ka transponders on 99/103 that would be empty. If they were going to do that, why even bother making reverse band dishes because they'd have dozens of empty Ka transponders they could use for 4K.

IMHO it makes more sense to expand the bandwidth for the HD channels to improve PQ and fully utilize their resources. That gives them a marketable advantage over Dish and cable. Of course that would mean fewer HD channels on 101, but I'd guess the top 100 channels get over 95% of viewing hours, and the next 50 probably get less than 2%. If RV customers are missing a channel they consider important enough, they'll get an HD dish.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

slice1900 said:


> That writeup says NOTHING about continuing to use 119, so I will go with Stuart who said Directv specifically told dealers that 119 was going away. It says "_At that time, SD transmissions originating from the 101W orbital slot will be converted to high-definition (HD) format, and SD transmissions originating from the 119W satellite will be terminated." _If 119 was going to broadcast HD channels, it wouldn't have said different things for 101 & 119. I think the next line is just a KVH misunderstanding, there will be no 119 after next summer.
> 
> Keeping 119 around makes no sense. It would only add 7 CONUS transponders, and only has a couple years of remaining life at best (back in 2014 Directv renewed its license for 7 years until 2021) AT&T sure as hell won't pay to launch a new satellite for the convenience of the small minority of RV customers who have a dish that can receive 119 (especially since RV customers are already a small minority of Directv customers) What's the point of adding 7 transponders worth of channels, there will still be some channels they can't get. There's ZERO chance that 110 sticks around. In fact, I'll bet it is gone before the end of the year, and that's why the rush to move T15 to 101 since T16 wasn't going to launch in time.
> 
> ...


So is it still possible that they will offer SD in MPEG-4 as many here have posited?


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

slice1900 said:


> Keeping 119 around makes no sense. It would only add 7 CONUS transponders, and only has a couple years of remaining life at best (back in 2014 Directv renewed its license for 7 years until 2021) AT&T sure as hell won't pay to launch a new satellite for the convenience of the small minority of RV customers who have a dish that can receive 119 (especially since RV customers are already a small minority of Directv customers) What's the point of adding 7 transponders worth of channels, there will still be some channels they can't get. There's ZERO chance that 110 sticks around. In fact, I'll bet it is gone before the end of the year, and that's why the rush to move T15 to 101 since T16 wasn't going to launch in time.


Whatever they do, they will never ever not have controlling interests in satellites at 119W and 110W. If they don't occupy the spaces, they lose the licenses. If they occupy them, they get an automatic license renewal upon filing.
They can keep something semi-dead there or they can lease the frequencies to someone else that can place satellites there and Directv will make some money leasing the space, but whatever they do, they will not let FCC or some other company gain or regain control of those slot's Directv transponder frequencies.

If they drop them, the slot frequencies go out for bid and it would be anybody's guess who would grab them since they are in the prime locations for Conus coverage.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> I would be torn between using more bandwidth for better PQ and adding local sub-channels. I know I have mentioned the local sub-channels before but now I think they don't really need to carry all of them just carry the classic TV show sub-channels? Would their be room just for those with the new Satellite configuration?


If you're questioning that the subchannels be delivered into individual local markets by spotbeams, then the new configuration will only leave the current Ka band spots as they exist now. So whether or not enough capacity is there to do that, I severely doubt. At least for some markets.

But if you mean to carry these subchannels as nationwide networks, then yes, the new configuration will leave plenty of bandwidth on the Ka band for that.

The question is, contractually can and will DIRECTV be able to treat them as national networks? ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

GordonGekko said:


> So is it still possible that they will offer SD in MPEG-4 as many here have posited?


This document makes it clear that they will not offer MPEG4 SD _duplicates_ of channels they carry in HD, but of course there will be plenty of MPEG4 SD channels for those channels that they don't offer in HD or aren't available in HD.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

HoTat2 said:


> If you're questioning that the subchannels be delivered into individual local markets by spotbeams, then the new configuration will only leave the current Ka band spots as they exist now. So whether or not enough capacity is there to do that, I severely doubt. At least for some markets.
> 
> But if you mean to carry these subchannels as nationwide networks, then yes, the new configuration will leave plenty of bandwidth on the Ka band for that.
> 
> ...


Sorry, I deleted my last post because I remembered Slice1900 saying that with that new DTV antenna coming out that DTV would probably want you to get the local sub-channels that way. I did mean carry them as local spotbeams because I wasn't sure if they had national feeds of those channels. I think METV and H&I does but not sure about the other ones.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

spear61 said:


> Whatever they do, they will never ever not have controlling interests in satellites at 119W and 110W. If they don't occupy the spaces, they lose the licenses.


I don't remember who it was who told me this - but it was on dbstalk - apparently it isn't that easy or that quick for the FCC to pull a license. They could move T8 to 119 and hold the odd numbered transponders (which I think will hold the entire license) since it has fuel life until 2034. They don't need to broadcast anything that customers receive. Completely abandoning the slot may make it quicker for the FCC to pull the license, but I'm not even sure about that...

When you apply for a slot they give you five years to build and operate the satellite, so who knows maybe it takes five years to pull it. Worse comes to worse they could tell the FCC they are building a new satellite and post the bond. IIRC its a few million dollars (may be less if it is based on number of transponders) and just not do it. That would hold the slots until the mid 2020s for the cost of the bond (two orders of magnitude cheaper than actually building/launching a satellite)

I've said before I think Dish drops satellite before Directv since they have half as many satellite customers and higher infrastructure cost thanks to having two arcs, so it becomes uneconomic for them years before it does for Directv. So they may not even be around to attempt to gain use of Directv's 110/119 transponders.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

When we first heard about T16 there were rumors that Directv had originally contracted for two new satellites, then canceled one in the planning stages. That pretty much had to have been a satellite intended for 119 - there isn't anywhere else they could use a new satellite. I think they realized they had no use for 119, or came up with a cheaper way to keep those transponders out of Dish's hands.

They are probably not worried about Dish getting their hands on 110, since it is only three transponders it hardly helps their bandwidth shortage.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> That writeup says NOTHING about continuing to use 119,


I quoted the exact line from the document where use of 119 was mentioned. You may read that as "nothing" but something WAS said.

Even the text you quoted from Stewart supports some continued use of 119. You quoted: "At that time, SD transmissions originating from the 101W orbital slot will be converted to high-definition (HD) format, and SD transmissions originating from the 119W satellite will be terminated." Where are you reading ALL transmissions from 119W will be terminated? Stewart's quote matches the "leak" stating *SD* will be terminated - no statement that all transmissions will be terminated.



slice1900 said:


> This document makes it clear that they will not offer MPEG4 SD _duplicates_ of channels they carry in HD, but of course there will be plenty of MPEG4 SD channels for those channels that they don't offer in HD or aren't available in HD.


To be honest, the document does not say that. If one reads the document as written it supports the claim that SD channels will be converted to HD.

The logical mind says no ... DIRECTV would not convert a SD feed to HD. I believe the document suffers from the same MPEG2=SD and MPEG4=HD confusion that infected most of these threads. If one reads the document as "MPEG2 will be converted to MPEG4 and MPEG2 will be terminated" it matches the logic that you and I would easily accept.

*DIRECTV has not yet identified the specific channel listing that will be available from the 101W or 119W satellites once the transition is completed.*
That we should all agree on.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

That's the one thing I feared that if they did not offer any SD duplicates what would they do about HD staying out longer in bad weather? I have perfect numbers in 90's and HD still stays out for 10 mins or more. I guess you would have to use their streaming APP when that happens? Would HD duplicates in the KU band be good for bad weather backup? I still like DTV's PQ.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> When you apply for a slot they give you five years to build and operate the satellite, so who knows maybe it takes five years to pull it.


I found one reference that stated "Usual FCC procedure is to allow a satellite operator just 90 days to leave a slot vacant." Source So 90 days after DIRECTV eventually turns off the satellite? Considering a satellite could operate beyond EOL (as long as enough fuel remains to put the satellite in a safe orbit when transmissions cease) token programming on a dying satellite could hold the slot.

There is a clause in the license: "The licensee shall, during the term of the license, render such Direct Broadcast Satellite service as will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity." So one could argue that more than token service would be needed. But I (my opinion) would not consider the slot in jeopardy as long as a satellite was transmitting something.

DISH vacated 148 in 2009 and lost the slot June 1st, 2012 (after delays in providing a replacement satellite).


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> That's the one thing I feared that if they did not offer any SD duplicates what would they do about HD staying out longer in bad weather? I have perfect numbers in 90's and HD still stays out for 10 mins or more. I guess you would have to use their streaming APP when that happens? Would HD duplicates in the KU band be good for bad weather backup? I still like DTV's PQ.


I believe your weather related outages are more of a comparison of Ka signals (where most HD lives) with Ku signals (where most SD lives). Try to receive a SD channel on Ka during a weather outage and see SD vs HD makes a difference.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> That writeup says NOTHING about continuing to use 119, so I will go with Stuart who said Directv specifically told dealers that 119 was going away. It says "_At that time, SD transmissions originating from the 101W orbital slot will be converted to high-definition (HD) format, and SD transmissions originating from the 119W satellite will be terminated." _If 119 was going to broadcast HD channels, it wouldn't have said different things for 101 & 119. I think the next line is just a KVH misunderstanding, there will be no 119 after next summer.
> 
> Keeping 119 around makes no sense. It would only add 7 CONUS transponders, and only has a couple years of remaining life at best (back in 2014 Directv renewed its license for 7 years until 2021) AT&T sure as hell won't pay to launch a new satellite for the convenience of the small minority of RV customers who have a dish that can receive 119 (especially since RV customers are already a small minority of Directv customers) What's the point of adding 7 transponders worth of channels, there will still be some channels they can't get. There's ZERO chance that 110 sticks around. In fact, I'll bet it is gone before the end of the year, and that's why the rush to move T15 to 101 since T16 wasn't going to launch in time.
> 
> ...


well how much bandwidth will RSN's in 4K need?? and they want to have that on the main non reverse band slots. Direct can not miss adding them when local cable system start to add them.


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

James Long said:


> I quoted the exact line from the document where use of 119 was mentioned. You may read that as "nothing" but something WAS said.
> 
> Even the text you quoted from Stewart supports some continued use of 119. You quoted: "At that time, SD transmissions originating from the 101W orbital slot will be converted to high-definition (HD) format, and SD transmissions originating from the 119W satellite will be terminated." Where are you reading ALL transmissions from 119W will be terminated? Stewart's quote matches the "leak" stating *SD* will be terminated - no statement that all transmissions will be terminated.
> 
> ...


Only time will tell, I hope they offer SD duplicates as I don't like how the dvr fast forwards in HD while watching sports.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

GordonGekko said:


> Only time will tell, I hope they offer SD duplicates as I don't like how the dvr fast forwards in HD while watching sports.


first, after a month of using it, you'll tell us how is good PQ for HD sports;
second, you will adapting to delays - it's our natural feature: ADAPTATION (remember, dinosaurs died not having it  )


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

JoeTheDragon said:


> well how much bandwidth will RSN's in 4K need?? and they want to have that on the main non reverse band slots. Direct can not miss adding them when local cable system start to add them.


any hint of using RB from 101W by T15 ?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> DISH vacated 148 in 2009 and lost the slot June 1st, 2012 (after delays in providing a replacement satellite).


That gives us a guideline of how long Directv could drag it out after vacating a slot. And as I said they don't really need to vacate 119, they could move D8 there and cover the odd transponders until 2034. Not sure if that would leave the even transponders open to being taken back or not, but that would hold onto 5 of the 11 at minimum. D9S might also have life left to hold onto those odds for a few years - it hasn't required an extension yet so it isn't clear how long they think it'll last.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

JoeTheDragon said:


> well how much bandwidth will RSN's in 4K need?? and they want to have that on the main non reverse band slots. Direct can not miss adding them when local cable system start to add them.


RSNs in 4K? Dream on, we don't even have ESPN or FS1 in 4K yet, and not even a timeframe for when they do. Then how much longer before ESPN2/ESPNU/FS2 go 4K? They are years away from having to worry about 4K RSNs, and I'm not sure why you think they want them "on the main non reverse band slots" when Directv has been pretty specific that all 4K will be moved to reverse band. That's why they have been installing reverse band dishes for everyone who gets 4K. Those 36 transponders will hold over 50 4K channels - which is more than we'll ever see, IMHO. Possibly a LOT more.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> any hint of using RB from 101W by T15 ?


There is no license for reverse band from 101, so no they will not and cannot use it. They could use Ka from 101, but without LNBs capable of receiving that (or reverse band from 101, for that matter) what would be the point? Given that they already have more bandwidth than they know what to do with, I'm not sure why you are even asking this.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

perhaps RV/boats could benefit for Ka and/or RB at 101W


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> RSNs in 4K? Dream on, we don't even have ESPN or FS1 in 4K yet


ROGERS and TSN have 4k games often.
Maybe the new cubs network? in 2019-2020 will be 4K.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

any news from FCC about T15 start day ? 10/4/18


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> any news from FCC about T15 start day ? 10/4/18


It already lit up almost two weeks ago with at least the traffic from T8 (odd numbered CONUS tps. from 101W) already transferred over. And traffic on T5 for PR in the process of moving there as well ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## grover517 (Sep 29, 2007)

P Smith said:


> perhaps RV/boats could benefit for Ka and/or RB at 101W


Ka, yes since some marine/rv dishes (Trav'ler, TracVision HD7 and HD11) can already handle Ka but the carry outs are all exclusively Ku and aren't even SWM capable without an additional SWM8 being installed. I have read where a few with the SWM capable Trav'ler dishes are experimenting with the newer digital SWM and RB LNB's (OEM LNB appears to be the old analog SWM3) so they can use the HS17 in their RV's but that is far from the norm and isn't supported by Winegard, at least at this point in time and since they can also already receive signals from 99 and 103, not really necessary.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> It already lit up almost two weeks ago with at least the traffic from T8


that would be in violation with FCC rules &#8230; STA opening transmission is Oct 4th
or there some leeway for ATT/DTV ?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> that would be in violation with FCC rules &#8230; STA opening transmission is Oct 4th
> or there some leeway for ATT/DTV ?


That's exactly what Tom Speer thought a few days ago, until I pointed out at the time that a careful reading of the initial 30 day STA for T15's movement to 100.85W to begin on 9/4 DIRECTV submitted back on 8/17 and approved by the FCC on 8/28.

Includes both the move and to "operate" T15 once there as well.

See my post on the iamanedgecutter site here ...

D15 Moving from 103W to 101W - Page 5

Followed by Tom's retraction in the next post ...

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

JoeTheDragon said:


> ROGERS and TSN have 4k games often.
> Maybe the new cubs network? in 2019-2020 will be 4K.


No one in the US is showing those. You aren't going to see 4K RSNs before you see full time 4K sports channels, if Directv feels like carrying them they'd probably just schedule them on channel 106 like they do the other spotty 4K broadcasts.

The RSNs are going to struggle with declining revenue due to cord cutting just like ESPN is. Fox is probably in the best position to launch a 4K sports channel since they are flush with cash from selling off their other stuff - but that other stuff included all their RSNs. Whoever ends up owning them will likely be purchasing them using debt, and not eager to increase that debt by going 4K when it doesn't mean a dime of additional revenue for them.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> No one in the US is showing those.


Not to mention, even in Canada TSN 4K and Rogers Sportsnet 4K are just event channels. Outside of the Blue Jays home games and select NHL home games, they air the same things we get on channel 106 and occasionally 105. Since, like most international broadcasters, they just simulcast the US or UK coverage for non-Canadian productions.

As for the Blue Jays and NHL, as has been mentioned countless times this has been brought up, it's not up to DirecTV to provide it in 4K, it's up to the US right holders of those games to offer them in 4K. i.e. we have seen some of the Blue Jays 4K games, but only when it was a MLB Network showcase game.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> Followed by Tom's retraction in the next post ...


I'm not an active member there - thanks


----------



## GekkoDBS (Dec 5, 2015)

P Smith said:


> first, after a month of using it, you'll tell us how is good PQ for HD sports;
> second, you will adapting to delays - it's our natural feature: ADAPTATION (remember, dinosaurs died not having it  )


I use HD, picture quality is better, dvr for sports is not good, not easy to follow sets of plays, nobody knows for certain what caused the extinction of the dinosaurs, one theory, a comet or asteroid, you do realize the same thing could wipe out all of humanity but again your all caps word has nothing to do with my original post.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

KyL416 said:


> Not to mention, even in Canada TSN 4K and Rogers Sportsnet 4K are just event channels. Outside of the Blue Jays home games and select NHL home games, they air the same things we get on channel 106 and occasionally 105. Since, like most international broadcasters, they just simulcast the US or UK coverage for non-Canadian productions.
> 
> As for the Blue Jays and NHL, as has been mentioned countless times this has been brought up, it's not up to DirecTV to provide it in 4K, it's up to the US right holders of those games to offer them in 4K. i.e. we have seen some of the Blue Jays 4K games, but only when it was a MLB Network showcase game.


Directv can pickup the 4K feeds up TSN and ROGERS for the out of market stuff if they want to. Like they do for the HD feeds. (they can if they really want to not have duel feeds with tsn/rogers/cbc. at all)


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

JoeTheDragon said:


> Directv can pickup the 4K feeds up TSN and ROGERS for the out of market stuff if they want to. Like they do for the HD feeds. (they can if they really want to not have duel feeds with tsn/rogers/cbc. at all)


Nope. The only way they can do so is if the NHL and MLB allow them to do so as part of a 4K version of Center Ice and Extra Innings.

It's pretty much the same way how ESPN's NCAA packages Game Plan and Full Court weren't allowed to be offered in HD until they relaunched them as College Extra, even though HD feeds of those games were already available on C-band for local syndication.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

KyL416 said:


> Nope. The only way they can do so is if the NHL and MLB allow them to do so as part of a 4K version of Center Ice and Extra Innings.
> 
> It's pretty much the same way how ESPN's NCAA packages Game Plan and Full Court weren't allowed to be offered in HD until they relaunched them as College Extra, even though HD feeds of those games were already available on C-band for local syndication.


That package was fully ESPN controlled and directv tried to get in HD and it got very close.

For NHL in the past they Just give out SD feeds for free and systems had to source and pay for the HD feeds on there own. Directv mainly just remapped feeds and there was time they where the only ones with MSG HD feeds for the out of market use.

I think in the past the NBA just give out one feed per game and systems had to source and pay for added dual feeds.

In the past I think that WGNA was remapped for MLB EI?


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

I talked to a Rep a few days ago and mentioned the 2019 SD shutdown. 

He stated the following.

Time Table is summer of 2019.

They are not switching the SD to MP4 they are removing them!
I asked him what would happen to the channels that have no HD version. He said that the stations have been notified that they will be removed if they do not have HD. He mentioned something about the possibility that some of them may upscale the image before sending it to them.

All current SD units will be replaced by DTV for a HD receiver or HD DVR. No new models just the same existing equipment they have today.

RV and Boat owners will need to upgrade to HD capable dishes if they want all the channels. He did not seem to know much about how this would be done.

They are not changing LNB's on dishes so whatever TP's are there in KU will remain, it's just that they will be used for HD channels.

My personal feeling is that this is a lot easier said than done.
I know several people who are still using a minimal package and an old dish for just SD. I am not sure if DTV is going to do this on the scheduled timetable as it would drop a lot of customers straight into the hands of DishNetwork. I do not see boat owners and RV owners changing their systems when they can just change providers. This will cause directv to lose their home accounts as well. I suspect that the switch will happen but on a very gradual basis as they phase out SD's that have HD duplicates slowly, then wait for the calls and evaluate the customer responses.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

the Rep could share with you his own personal vision of the process … I would wait for official DTV press-release


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

dreadlk said:


> I asked him what would happen to the channels that have no HD version. He said that the stations have been notified that they will be removed if they do not have HD. He mentioned something about the possibility that some of them may upscale the image before sending it to them.


Yeah, that section alone says the rep was feeding you BS.

The stations don't have the bandwidth on their C-Band transponders to pointlessly upconvert channels they have no intention of launching in HD before they send it to DirecTV. And DirecTV is not going to waste bandwidth upconverting SD only channels to 720p or 1080i HD, they're going to continue to carry them in MPEG4/SD like they already do now for the MPEG4 P/I channels and the SD only locals in the MPEG4 only markets, as well as the MPEG4 simulcasts of SD only locals they've uplinked over the past 2 years in the soon to be former 119 markets.

There's also the contractual and legal nightmare it would create, since many of those SD only channels have carriage contracts tied to their HD sister stations, as well as no longer meeting the FCC mandated quota if they suddenly drop most of the P/I channels. Not to mention the 100+ Spanish and international channels that have no North American HD feeds, and the pay to play channels that have no HD feeds. They would also be in violation of the FCC must carry rules since many of those SD only locals use must carry status for carriage.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Don't believe what CSRs tell you, they have no clue. You can call Directv three times in a row, talk to three different CSRs and get three different answers - on almost any question!

They are NOT getting rid of SD channels that aren't HD, though based on other sources it does appear highly likely that SD duplicates will be going away. Boat/RVs owners will be able to get some subset of channels with a round dish (and HD receiver) after this happens, but no one knows what subset yet. For all we know, Directv is still deciding that part.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

dreadlk said:


> I talked to a Rep a few days ago and mentioned the 2019 SD shutdown.
> 
> He stated the following.
> 
> ...


You definelty are over reaching on the losing customers. This move allows them to keep all their customers easily. Much easier to do than say imho. Because most people won't understand the technical ways this is all happening.

And it is happening as gradual as needed. It's tatted months ago! It won't take a full year to do this.

And almost no one with rv dishes has to worry one bit about their dishes now. Just swap for free their receivers. Super simple.

And heck even an 18" dish at home would not have to be changed but I don't see DIRECTV not swapping that on a truck roll for a free equipment upgrade.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> That gives us a guideline of how long Directv could drag it out after vacating a slot. And as I said they don't really need to vacate 119, they could move D8 there and cover the odd transponders until 2034. Not sure if that would leave the even transponders open to being taken back or not, but that would hold onto 5 of the 11 at minimum. D9S might also have life left to hold onto those odds for a few years - it hasn't required an extension yet so it isn't clear how long they think it'll last.


Nah I don't think 119 is going away. I had been thinking they'd put 97 on a bss path or maybe just at 99 or 103. But i almost wonder if they plan on putting it on 119. Or just continuing to use it for PR for the few channels on d10-d12.

And I guess d15 is going to take over for all of 101 except maybe the spots. I think they may actually still need those spots but not sure. Depends on how many locals in some markets...


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

P Smith said:


> the Rep could share with you his own personal vision of the process &#8230; I would wait for official DTV press-release


Yep that's what I also thought at first and I am sure some of it is his own vision mixed in with things he has heard from higher ups.. I am reading all the other forum replies and they are just as full of speculation.

The guy I talked to was not a low level tier guy so I think he had some info on a few things. One thing he was absolutely certain of was that there was not going to be any SD channels left. I have heard people talk about "SD in mpeg2" is what they mean. He knew about mpeg2 and mpeg4 and said they are not going to be doing SD in Mpeg4.

IMHO as an EE for 34 years it makes a lot of sense. Companies will keep older standards alive for two variatons but almost never for three. They kept SD because it was just SD and HD. Now they have SD-HD and 4K to deal with. Something has got to go.

Look at most tech you see the same pattern, example Audio had LP Records then 8 Track then cassettes came along they got rid of 8 track then CD's came along they got rid of Cassettes then MP3 came along and they got rid of LP's. Leaving just digital MP3 type formats and CD's.

I don't know how they will hammer it out and I doubt the time frame will hold but I have a feeling that SD is going the way of the Dodo.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

dreadlk said:


> One thing he was absolutely certain of was that there was not going to be any SD channels left. I have heard people talk about "SD in mpeg2" is what they mean. He knew about mpeg2 and mpeg4 and said they are not going to be doing SD in Mpeg4.


See my previous posts on why that is flat out wrong, and not just from an obvious logistics standpoint (i.e. C-Band transponder bandwidth requirements on the station's end to pointlessly upconvert a SD only station they have no plans or reason to make HD), but also a contractual/legal/regulatory one too for the other reasons mentioned. You should take anything he told you with a grain of salt for that bogus claim alone, especially if he doubled down on it.



dreadlk said:


> IMHO as an EE for 34 years it makes a lot of sense. Companies will keep older standards alive for two variatons but almost never for three. They kept SD because it was just SD and HD. Now they have SD-HD and 4K to deal with. Something has got to go.


What you just said here makes ZERO sense. NOTHING "has got to go"... (Again read my previous posts for numerous examples of the types of channels that will not be available in HD at all and the actual reasons why, and no, those reasons are NOT "speculation" like you claim)



dreadlk said:


> Look at most tech you see the same pattern, example Audio had LP Records then 8 Track then cassettes came along they got rid of 8 track then CD's came along they got rid of Cassettes then MP3 came along and they got rid of LP's. Leaving just digital MP3 type formats and CD's.


That's comparing apples and oranges... This is NOT an analog recordings vs digital recordings or a physical medium vs digital distribution change. SD/HD/UHD is just a difference of pixel count, bitrates and the codecs used in some cases. Heck if you pay attention to the weekly transponder maps that are linked in another thread here you would see that MPEG4/SD channels already exist and share many of the same transponders as HD channels on the 99 and 103 slots. And if you have been paying attention for the past two years, you would have seen them add MPEG4/SD simulcasts of the SD only locals from the soon to be former 119 markets.

Before you say anything further, go lookup who owns invididual stations that are SD only, who their sister HD stations are, and readup on how things are bundled together in carriage contracts. Also lookup the rules for Must Carry status when it comes to locals, Public/Interest quotas, and check around on the ad sales site and inquire about pay to play carriage. (In other words, numerous channels they can NOT refuse to carry simply because they're not available in HD) Also lookup how channels originate on C-Band and Ku-Band and everything else on those transponders to see how limited they are in their options and why the idea of stations upconverting SD only channels to HD before they send them to DirecTV is a non-starter. And don't just pay attention to the channels that are part of the main English packages, there's also about 100+ Spanish and International SD only channels that are simply not available at all in HD in North America that have to be accounted for too and how they originate on C-Band and Ku-Band. (Channels where World Direct subscribers have to pay anything from $10 to $50+ for them depending on the international package, so no, they will NOT be dropping them simply because they don't have the bandwidth to go HD in North America with the C-Band and Ku-Band transponders they are sharing with about 40 other international channels)
You might also want to check the Puerto Rican listings in the transponder maps where they have a lot more MPEG4/SD channels and see how many MPEG4/SD channels fit on one transponder vs how many MPEG4/HD channels fit on a single transponder, to see why it would be a massive waste of bandwidth to pointlessly upconvert SD only channels to HD.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

dreadlk said:


> Yep that's what I also thought at first and I am sure some of it is his own vision mixed in with things he has heard from higher ups.. I am reading all the other forum replies and they are just as full of speculation.
> 
> The guy I talked to was not a low level tier guy so I think he had some info on a few things. One thing he was absolutely certain of was that there was not going to be any SD channels left. I have heard people talk about "SD in mpeg2" is what they mean. He knew about mpeg2 and mpeg4 and said they are not going to be doing SD in Mpeg4.
> 
> ...


Would they do HD duplicates on the KU band for bad weather backup?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> Would they do HD duplicates on the KU band for bad weather backup?


That probably won't even be possible. Right now it's a hide SD duplicates option that isn't tied to a specific band/satellite slot (i.e. the Spanish HD channels on 119 are on Ku-band and their SD counterparts are also affected by the option) It's also burried in a menu that the average subscriber has no idea exists. (As we saw the night of the D10 fiasco where on social media they had to explain where to find this setting so people can get the SD feeds of the missing channels before they were reuplinked to D14 later that night) By the time someone would get to the menu and toggle it and the duplicates finally show up, either the heaviest rainclouds that cause fade would pass, it would intense to the point that the Ku-Band channels go out too, or you would have missed enough of the show to the point where you're better off waiting for a VOD airing of the show.

Plus, from the actual documentation we have seen, the Ku-band will already contain a subsection of channels. So just drop the idea of them having "duplicates" on Ku-band, it's not happening. Any channels that move to Ku-Band will be the only place they exist on DirecTV. No one who can say anything publically at this time knows which channels those are. Plus engineering wise they are limited in what they can put where to account for Puerto Rican mirroring needs. Like right now with D15 only the odd transponders from the 101 slot are available in Puerto Rico via mirroring.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dreadlk said:


> Companies will keep older standards alive for two variatons but almost never for three. They kept SD because it was just SD and HD. Now they have SD-HD and 4K to deal with. Something has got to go.


No, SD does not have to go. I'll agree with your premise when talking about MPEG-2 vs MPEG-4 - MPEG-2 must stay until all receivers can receive MPEG-4. Also QPSK vs 8PSK - QPSK must stay until all receivers can receive 8PSK. Once all receivers can support MPEG-4 or 8PSK there is no benefit to maintaining the old encoding. But there is no reason why SD "must" go away to support 4K.

There is zero benefit to upconverting SD to HD at the uplink (HD receivers do a good job up upconverting SD at the receive end). And if one is going to be strict and say there can only be two formats what will you do with the audio only channels? Upgrade them to HD bandwidth to show a slate of the logo? That, along with upconverting SD to HD at the uplink, is a waste of resources (satellite bandwidth).

4K is growing but is practically experimental via satellite.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

James Long said:


> No, SD does not have to go. I'll agree with your premise when talking about MPEG-2 vs MPEG-4 - MPEG-2 must stay until all receivers can receive MPEG-4. Also QPSK vs 8PSK - QPSK must stay until all receivers can receive 8PSK. Once all receivers can support MPEG-4 or 8PSK there is no benefit to maintaining the old encoding. But there is no reason why SD "must" go away to support 4K.
> 
> There is zero benefit to upconverting SD to HD at the uplink (HD receivers do a good job up upconverting SD at the receive end). And if one is going to be strict and say there can only be two formats what will you do with the audio only channels? Upgrade them to HD bandwidth to show a slate of the logo? That, along with upconverting SD to HD at the uplink, is a waste of resources (satellite bandwidth).
> 
> 4K is growing but is practically experimental via satellite.


I have signal strength in the 90's and HD still is out for 10 mins or more before coming back is that normal?


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

OK so I am just going to go with all of the wisdom that has been spoken on the subject and i am not being sarcastic. I respect that many of you guys have been following this subject with great intensity while I really have not been doing that.

So my question is what do you think they mean when they say SD will be shutdown in 2019?

I am also wondering if anybody knows of a chart that has the baseband frequencies for the various satellites. I am thinking of carrying home a spectrum analyzer from work and looking at the signals coming from the LNB's but I need to know the frequency range that each LNB down converts to.

Thanks


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

dreadlk said:


> So my question is what do you think they mean when they say SD will be shutdown in 2019?


We already know what they mean. They mean MPEG2/SD will be shutdown.

Unfortunately way too many people use MPEG2 and SD interchangeably. Think of it like the digital transition where "digital" and "HDTV" were being used interchangeably.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> We already know what they mean. They mean MPEG2/SD will be shutdown.
> 
> Unfortunately way too many people use MPEG2 and SD interchangeably. Think of it like the digital transition where "digital" and "HDTV" were being used interchangeably.


So are you saying that all the SD channels on 101 etc will be moved to MPEG4 and the process will be seamless to those of us with newer receivers? If that is the case I think Directv did a horrible job with it's press release. They should have just stated that SD receivers sold before a certain date will need to be upgraded and list the model numbers.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The only things going out are notices to individual subscribers who actually need to have their receivers swapped on a market by market basis since they are starting with locals. If you are affected you will get a notice mailed to you when your market's locals are targetted. (i.e. so far none of the markets with locals on the 101 slot got a notice mailed to them)

They already ceased installation of SD only equipment a year or two ago for new installations, and are no longer activating new SD equipment on eixsting accounts.

If you already have all HD equipment you won't need to do anything and won't receive a notice, and the average subscriber under that category won't notice anything at all unless they disabled the default Hide SD Duplicates setting.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

dreadlk said:


> So are you saying that all the SD channels on 101 etc will be moved to MPEG4 and the process will be seamless to those of us with newer receivers? ....


No;

If what happens is that the 101W Ku band will eventually carry a group of most popular HD channels moved from the Ka band. Then all MPEG-2 SD channels currently on Ku without HD equivalents on the Ka band will be converted to MPEG-4 format and moved to the Ka band on 99 or 103W.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> Nah I don't think 119 is going away. I had been thinking they'd put 97 on a bss path or maybe just at 99 or 103. But i almost wonder if they plan on putting it on 119. Or just continuing to use it for PR for the few channels on d10-d12.


Sorry, I don't buy it. They don't need the bandwidth - once they drop the SD duplicates they will have much more bandwidth than they will know what to do with even without 119.

I suppose theoretically they could tilt it towards PR, but that's a short term solution. Its license expired in 2014 and they renewed it for 7 years until 2021. If they knew it had more fuel life why wouldn't they have asked for a longer license? So it seems pretty likely it only has 2-3 years left, and sure won't be worth the money it would cost to build/launch a new one.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I see the following...

Only one version of every channel will exist...if the channel is in Hi Definition, it will be Hi Definition. If there is no Hi Definition feed, it’ll be SD. It will all be mpeg4.

4K is a separate animal and it’ll be what it is...

I think they will have a decision to make... keep quality about the same as it is today, or increase quality and keep using 119 for foreign, and or For PR for mirroring of channels that are coming from d10-d12 that they can’t also fit on all the spot beams they have shooting towards PR. Has anyone done the math to see what that might work out too? 

If they can get all those there without 119, then I might buy they are going to do something else with 119, like backbone communications or something...

Until we see them mirroring all of 95 on any other satelites, they wont start swapping out dishes for international, and if they aren’t doing that, then I see no where but 119 for that stuff at 95 to land at the moment, because they won’t swap people hand have them lose channels for months till they shut down sd duplicates. I don’t believe the people with two dishes are necessarily in need of 99 or 103 slots...

And slice, them not extending the life of the license further doesn’t mean squat. Look how long they waited before filing to move d15 and the fact they are all temporary ones and not permanent ones yet, and we know that either it or d16 is obviously going to 101 and we have heard no mention of when d16 is being launched yet.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

KyL416 said:


> dreadlk said:
> 
> 
> > So my question is what do you think they mean when they say SD will be shutdown in 2019?
> ...


Exactly. The only thing we "know" is that MPEG2/SD will be shut down. Everything else is an educated guess ... with some people less educated in their guessing.



dreadlk said:


> So are you saying that all the SD channels on 101 etc will be moved to MPEG4 and the process will be seamless to those of us with newer receivers? If that is the case I think Directv did a horrible job with it's press release.


What press release? There have been notices to individual subscribers and some internal communication but there has been no press release.

I expect that it will be seamless for HD subscribers. The only thing they might notice is losing SD duplicates (IF any SD duplicates are taken away). DIRECTV is working through upgrading SD subscribers to HD equipment. I believe the only people who will be negatively affected are those who refuse to be upgraded.



HoTat2 said:


> If what happens ...


That is the best any of us can do. Start with the word IF and then say something that may or may not become true. (Yes, I am in that club.) Educated guesses.



dreadlk said:


> I am also wondering if anybody knows of a chart that has the baseband frequencies for the various satellites. I am thinking of carrying home a spectrum analyzer from work and looking at the signals coming from the LNB's but I need to know the frequency range that each LNB down converts to.


The output depends on the LNB. A non-SWM LNB will use block downconversion of the polarities on the satellite. A SWM LNB will have various transponders from each satellite (each transponder as requested by one of the satellite receivers). In either case you'll see a lot of wiggly lines ... which can be fun.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

James Long said:


> I believe the only people who will be negatively affected are those who refuse to be upgraded.


and those who are on boats and in RV with domes.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

inkahauts said:


> Has anyone done the math to see what that might work out too?


kidding ? it was done - look at the thread...

but it wouldn't change no one bit of decision of DTV, regardless how know the math, frequency plan, sat transponders, FEC, SR, modulation, rain-fade attenuation and size of dish's reflector !


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> and those who are on boats and in RV with domes.


I'd say just to be clearer though ...

It's those who are on boats and in RVs with domes that can only see DIRECTV's Ku band satellite slots. Which constitutes the great majority of them.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> I think they will have a decision to make... keep quality about the same as it is today, or increase quality and keep using 119 for foreign, and or For PR for mirroring of channels that are coming from d10-d12 that they can't also fit on all the spot beams they have shooting towards PR. Has anyone done the math to see what that might work out too?


If they were going to move the international channels from 95 to 119, they'd have been installing an SL5 alongside the 95 dish for any new international installs. I have no idea if that's the case, but if they haven't been, there's 0% chance they will relocate international channels on 119.

The ~60 channels carried on 95 will fit in three transponders on 99/101/103 in MPEG4, and the channels carried on 119 could fit in four. I don't know how many MPEG2 SD only channels there are 101, let's be conservative and call it another three transponders worth after they've been converted to MPEG4. That's a total of 10 additional transponders required, and 32 additional transponders will be made available on 101 after MPEG2 SD goes away. The math more than works out to fit everything on 99/101/103 AND have room with the addition of 22 new transponders to 'spread out' for additional HD quality and provide for the handful of remaining SD only channels that Directv converts to HD each year nowadays.

As for PR, they've been getting along fine having FAR fewer HD channels than the US for years, they are getting a lot more channels in HD now but where is it written they have to get ALL the channels in HD that the US gets. Directv will do what they can to get them their most watched channels in HD, but there are too few subscribers there (or even potential subscribers) for them to spend a lot of money on making this happen. So no new satellite to 119. If they use the existing one for this, it would only be a short term plan - there would be nothing they can do when it runs out of fuel and needs to go the graveyard orbit. What's the point of giving them HD for a few years, only to take it away from them? And that assumes some people there don't have LOS issues to 119. Installers there never had a way to check for 101 or 119. They can be pretty sure 101 is OK since 99 & 103 are, but 119 is another matter.


----------



## BigRedFan (Mar 28, 2010)

I remember reading here a few years ago that the few HD channels on 119 were in MPEG-2, not MPEG-4. If all the channels on 119 (SD & HD) are vacated to 99/101/103 is it safe to assume that the transferred HD's would be switched to MPEG-4 ? And would this switch make a difference as to potentially adding more HD's in Spanish (if package is no longer at 119) ?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

BigRedFan said:


> I remember reading here a few years ago that the few HD channels on 119 were in MPEG-2, not MPEG-4.


Umm ? Have you seen it in Gary's weekly maps posting here last few years ? Perhaps URL to that "reading"?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

BigRedFan said:


> I remember reading here a few years ago that the few HD channels on 119 were in MPEG-2, not MPEG-4. If all the channels on 119 (SD & HD) are vacated to 99/101/103 is it safe to assume that the transferred HD's would be switched to MPEG-4 ? And would this switch make a difference as to potentially adding more HD's in Spanish (if package is no longer at 119) ?


No, you're likely referring to a much older system DIRECTV used when they first began HD broadcasts back in the early 2000s. When they initially used an MPEG-2 (or DSS based) 1280x1080 "HD-lite" format for a few channels on the 101, 110, and 119W Ku band satellites.

Today the only HD channels on 119W are four Spanish MPEG-4 (or "A3") based ones on tp. 24 there.

As for whether or not all Spanish programming will be moved to the Ka band at 99/103W and converted to HD.

I would say "likey" to the first since they'll be lots more bandwidth on Ka for them with many HD channels supposedly vacating it for 101W Ku.

However I would say "no" or "highly unlikely" to the second. As the Spanish channels will almost certainly remain as they currently are, in mostly SD, due to reasons KyL416 pointed out earlier. But converted to MPEG-4 and moved to the Ka band.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## BigRedFan (Mar 28, 2010)

HoTat2 said:


> No, you're likely referring to a much older system DIRECTV used when they first began HD broadcasts back in the early 2000s. When they initially used an MPEG-2 (or DSS based) 1280x1080 "HD-lite" format for a few channels on the 101, 110, and 119W Ku band satellites.
> 
> Today the only HD channels on 119W are four Spanish MPEG-4 (or "A3") based ones on tp. 24 there.
> 
> ...


Yes, thanks, I was using as reference a print-out I had of Sixto's 4-19-09 HD Summary which showed four MPEG-2 HD channels at 119. Plus 6 others at 110.

I knew the HD's on 110 had been replaced with their MPEG-4 versions on the main sats but missed when the ones on 119 had been converted. Good to know !

As for the rest of the Spanish-language DTV channels in SD it looks like DirecTV can convert 21 of them to HD (as per the HD Chart over at AVS Forum). So that's potentially a big number for new HD's if 119 is vacated.

And more can come from the internationals on 95 and also 119 (if moved to the main sats), correct ?


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

BigRedFan said:


> I was using as reference a print-out I had of Sixto's 4-19-09 HD Summary which showed four MPEG-2 HD channels at 119. Plus 6 others at 110.


Does anyone remember what those first few HD channels were?


----------



## BigRedFan (Mar 28, 2010)

TheRatPatrol said:


> Does anyone remember what those first few HD channels were?


Yes, they were: 
Ch. 70- HBO East
Ch. 72- ESPN 2
Ch. 73- ESPN
Ch. 75- TNT
Ch. 76- Discovery HD Theater
Ch. 79- HD Net


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

BigRedFan said:


> Yes, thanks, I was using as reference a print-out I had of Sixto's 4-19-09 HD Summary which showed four MPEG-2 HD channels at 119. Plus 6 others at 110.
> 
> I knew the HD's on 110 had been replaced with their MPEG-4 versions on the main sats but missed when the ones on 119 had been converted. Good to know !
> 
> ...





BigRedFan said:


> ...
> 
> As for the rest of the Spanish-language DTV channels in SD it looks like DirecTV can convert 21 of them to HD (as per the HD Chart over at AVS Forum). So that's potentially a big number for new HD's if 119 is vacated.
> 
> And more can come from the internationals on 95 and also 119 (if moved to the main sats), correct ?


Well DIRECTV does not convert anything to HD, but must receive it, usually over C-band feeds, from the program providers that way. And then be contracted to carry the HD version of the channel on their system.

This is why I said earlier, don't look for the Spanish SD channels to necessarily switch to HD versions if/when they're converted to MPEG-4 and moved to the Ka band satellites at 99/103W. As the question changing to HD carriage from the SD version of a channel is a totally separate issue.

And yes, I look for the ("World Direct") international channels on 95W (along with all remaining foreign language programming on 119W) to eventually be moved to MPEG-4 on the Ka band as well since the G3C satellite there is quite old now and I'm sure AT&T/DIRECTV would love to save money on the transponder lease fees.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

BigRedFan said:


> I was using as reference a print-out I had of Sixto's 4-19-09


OMG, it was ten years ago ! While DTV make changes each week - watch Gary Toma's posts at iamanedgecutter site to keep yourself on same plate.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> If they were going to move the international channels from 95 to 119, they'd have been installing an SL5 alongside the 95 dish for any new international installs. I have no idea if that's the case, but if they haven't been, there's 0% chance they will relocate international channels on 119.
> 
> The ~60 channels carried on 95 will fit in three transponders on 99/101/103 in MPEG4, and the channels carried on 119 could fit in four. I don't know how many MPEG2 SD only channels there are 101, let's be conservative and call it another three transponders worth after they've been converted to MPEG4. That's a total of 10 additional transponders required, and 32 additional transponders will be made available on 101 after MPEG2 SD goes away. The math more than works out to fit everything on 99/101/103 AND have room with the addition of 22 new transponders to 'spread out' for additional HD quality and provide for the handful of remaining SD only channels that Directv converts to HD each year nowadays.
> 
> As for PR, they've been getting along fine having FAR fewer HD channels than the US for years, they are getting a lot more channels in HD now but where is it written they have to get ALL the channels in HD that the US gets. Directv will do what they can to get them their most watched channels in HD, but there are too few subscribers there (or even potential subscribers) for them to spend a lot of money on making this happen. So no new satellite to 119. If they use the existing one for this, it would only be a short term plan - there would be nothing they can do when it runs out of fuel and needs to go the graveyard orbit. What's the point of giving them HD for a few years, only to take it away from them? And that assumes some people there don't have LOS issues to 119. Installers there never had a way to check for 101 or 119. They can be pretty sure 101 is OK since 99 & 103 are, but 119 is another matter.


A few years would probably be all they need. Contrary to others I expect at least one more bird to be built and launched someday. If they did then they could basically replace d10, d11 and d12 at that point and have the ability to mirror anything and everything to pr. Then I can see no longer using 119 pretty easily.

No idea how much they want to or need to mirror to pr or what they even can contractually but I'm sure they'd prefer the ability to if they wanted to.

And I haven't looked in ages but I thought some foreign is still on 119 and therefore everyone with a second dish does get 119 as well on the primary. Could be wrong on that but I seem to always see 5lnb dishes with the second dishes around me.

I would also guess some of the channels they broadcast to PR that are SD only right now may have a Hi Definition version in the US and since they want to get rid of all duplicates it makes sense they may need a bit more bandwidth to take care of that.

It really could go either way. But I think their top priority is killing all duplicate feeds and being all mpeg4 and hvec.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

inkahauts said:


> And I haven't looked in ages but I thought some foreign is still on 119


What ? You didn't get latest Gary's table and posting this from fading out old info ? Shame on you


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I guess this also means that DTV wont add any more SD only channels? If so we can really forget them even adding the national feeds of the classic TV channels since I think all of those are in SD except for METV and maybe CoziTV?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> I guess this also means that DTV wont add any more SD only channels? If so we can really forget them even adding the national feeds of the classic TV channels since I think all of those are in SD except for METV and maybe CoziTV?


Oh no, they still can and most likely will ....

But, only in MPEG-4 SD (or "A3" format) on the Ka band ...

And no longer in MPEG-2 SD (or "DSS" format) on the Ku band.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

HoTat2 said:


> Oh no, they still can and most likely will ....
> 
> But, only in MPEG-4 SD (or "A3" format) on the Ka band ...
> 
> ...


Didn't someone in this thread think the reason for getting rid of as much SD as possible, but keeping the current SD only channels, so they can free up bandwidth and be able to add more 4k?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> Didn't someone in this thread think the reason for getting rid of as much SD as possible, but keeping the current SD only channels, so they can free up bandwidth and be able to add more 4k?


If someone did it wouldn't be correct since 4K programming (if it ever really takes off) is destined for the Reverse Band, where there is lot's of bandwidth not even is use yet.

The upcoming SD transition is mainly about eliminating wasteful duplication of SD versions of HD channels on the Ka band, on the Ku band. And and also to get rid of the inefficient MPEG-2 compression format as well.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

CraigerM said:


> Didn't someone in this thread think the reason for getting rid of as much SD as possible, but keeping the current SD only channels, so they can free up bandwidth and be able to add more 4k?


"Someone in this thread" could be any wild speculation on the topic. Someone else could read your posts and say "someone in this thread" said something. Beyond the end of MPEG-2 SD (and only MPEG-2 SD) DIRECTV has not announced their plans. All MPEG-2 SD channels could be converted to MPEG-4 SD. Selected MPEG-2 SD channels could be dropped (assuming there are HD equivalents). AT&T|DIRECTV could shut down all satellites and ask their customers to use the new OTT service. They could also donate the system to charity. Obviously some outcomes are more likely than others.

There could still be MPEG-2 SD channels beyond December of 2019. Just don't count on them being around after April 2019.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

James Long said:


> "Someone in this thread" could be any wild speculation on the topic. Someone else could read your posts and say "someone in this thread" said something. Beyond the end of MPEG-2 SD (and only MPEG-2 SD) DIRECTV has not announced their plans. All MPEG-2 SD channels could be converted to MPEG-4 SD. Selected MPEG-2 SD channels could be dropped (assuming there are HD equivalents). AT&T|DIRECTV could shut down all satellites and ask their customers to use the new OTT service. They could also donate the system to charity. Obviously some outcomes are more likely than others. There could still be MPEG-2 SD channels beyond December of 2019. Just don't count on them being around after April 2019.



Sorry, I guess that is the best way and just wait until DTV announces what they are going to do.​


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> A few years would probably be all they need. Contrary to others I expect at least one more bird to be built and launched someday. If they did then they could basically replace d10, d11 and d12 at that point and have the ability to mirror anything and everything to pr. Then I can see no longer using 119 pretty easily.


I'm willing to bet T16 is the last satellite Directv ever builds. What they have now plus T16 should be good to go for about a decade. We don't know the fuel life of D11 or D12, but I'm sure Directv has a pretty good idea, and when one of those expires that's when their satellite offering starts to degrade - i.e. they'd lose the locals it is supplying (though they could move things around to lose only smaller markets) They'd also lose the CONUS transponders it is providing, but they'd have plenty of slack and would be able to tolerate that without any issues (and could easily go all HEVC by mid 2020s if they cared to)


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I would bet there will be a few MPEG2 SD channels remaining - like test channels, audio channels etc. They will need to keep at least one and perhaps more than one DSS transponder. As far as we know, they don't have the ability to carry MPEG4 on DSS, so if they carry channels on the remaining DSS transponder(s) they would most likely be MPEG2.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

It could be fully used by EPG/FW/service data


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> It could be fully used by EPG/FW/service data


It might be, if there's enough of that data there might not be enough room for any channels. That may well be the case if they decide to put everything onto a single DSS transponder, and the other 31 go DVB-S2.

It isn't really clear to me why they have the data spread out across so many transponders currently, rather than a few. If we knew that, we might know whether that's going to continue to be the plan in the future or they'll stuff everything onto transponder 32.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> why they have the data spread out across so many transponders currently, rather than a few.


IMO spreading SI data by small streams was easy way when DTV had limited bandwidth, to try fit them where they could not affecting channels
now, with Ka [and future RB] tpns, it's not an issue
perhaps, re-writing FW's [significant] part is not feasible with overloaded FW group, occupied by new GUI development what never end if we will count time and bugs posted here


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

P Smith said:


> and those who are on boats and in RV with domes.


And those without line of sight to the HD satellites.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

crkeehn said:


> And those without line of sight to the HD satellites.


The number of people who can see 101 but not 99 or 103 probably numbers in the dozens, if that. Such people won't be a factor in any decisions Directv makes.


----------



## crkeehn (Apr 23, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> The number of people who can see 101 but not 99 or 103 probably numbers in the dozens, if that. Such people won't be a factor in any decisions Directv makes.


For all I know, I could be the only person in the entire United States. I don't expect DirecTV to change their plans for me, however I also don't like being accused of refusing to upgrade, which a previous poster suggested was the only reason for not getting HD service.

At that point in time, DirecTV will have a choice to make. They will work with me to make sure that I can receive a signal, or they will lose me as a customer.


----------



## spear61 (Sep 19, 2004)

CraigerM said:


> I guess this also means that DTV wont add any more SD only channels? If so we can really forget them even adding the national feeds of the classic TV channels since I think all of those are in SD except for METV and maybe CoziTV?


I'm thinking this is all about getting rid of MPEG-2 and probably nothing else.
I may be mistaken, but If I remember correctly, the FCC rules are that if a local station wants carriage, the satellite companies must provide it.
So if there is a local SD channel wanting carriage, they would transmit it with the MPEG-4 standard (or the directv equivalent).


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

spear61 said:


> I may be mistaken, but If I remember correctly, the FCC rules are that if a local station wants carriage, the satellite companies must provide it.


Yes, it's called "must carry" status, where instead of asking for payments via retrans consent they declare free must carry status, but it only applies to the primary stream of a station. Subchannels cannot declare must carry status, they can only get carriage via retransmission consent negotiations with their local affiliate's owner, but on satellite that's usually limited to subchannels affiliated with one of the big 6 networks.

On cable subchannel carriage is handled as part of the retrans consent negotiations with the affiliated station, while for subchannels affiliated with a station that opted for must carry status, it's strictly up to the cable provider if they want to carry any of their subchannels. And if a station launches a new subchannel, sometimes they have to wait until their contract is up for renewal before they can get cable carriage, unless they planned ahead and included a clause in the previous contract for future subchannels. (i.e. Optimum in the NYC DMA doesn't carry any subchannels from the local stations that opted for must carry status like WPXN, WJLP, WZME, WRNN, WTBY, WMBC and WFTY, something that has been going on since the Cablevision days, so they don't carry Qubo, Ion Life, Grit, Escape, Stadium and Quest and they still don't offer some newly added subchannels like TBD from WPIX or Comet from WLNY)

PBS on the otherhand is another can of worms, they have a seperate deal with DirecTV where stations can opt for one of their subchannels being carried instead of having their HD feed carried.


----------



## doctor j (Jun 14, 2006)

T16 application posted on FCC website:

Notify going to License

Doctor j


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

doctor j said:


> T16 application posted on FCC website:
> 
> Notify going to License
> 
> Doctor j


Nice! So it is going to 103 as we thought based on T15 going to 101, and states that they anticipate it will be launched and operational in Q1 2019. Should be seeing it show up on a launch manifest somewhere pretty soon, I would think.

The one thing I'm curious about is that T15 was able to operate 24 Ka transponders out of 38 at once, T16 can operate 28 out of 38. I wonder why the change? Maybe it is just using more efficient solar panels so it has the budget to operate more at once? Because beyond covering all 24 Ka hi tpns, there doesn't seem to be any reason why it would want to operate 4 of the Ka lo tpns...


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Didn’t see where it showed configuration from that link. Any spots? And that really shows that t15 really is going to take over most if not all of 101 I am guessing within a year.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> Didn't see where it showed configuration from that link. Any spots? And that really shows that t15 really is going to take over most if not all of 101 I am guessing within a year.


Nah ... no spots ...

Original narrative describes T16 as indentical to T15 with the exception of the ability to operate 28 active Ka tps. at once instead of only 24 with T15 as slice notes.

And I agree T16's future assignment at 102.7W seems to make T15 a permanent fixture at 101W.

Which is why all the talk in the STAs filed by DIRECTV regarding T15's movement to 101W as "temporary" or to "fufill a temporary business need," ect., is very confusing language. Because the former satellites at 101W are done as other than emergency backups, since they do not have the technical capability to support the SD transition.

And it's rather ridiculous of course to have both T15 and its virtually identical twin T16, eventually placed at 103W.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Maybe they apply first for STA because it is an easier approval than a permanent move, or maybe they want to get T16 launched before they decide for sure to leave T15 at 101. i.e. if during the post launch testing T16 has issues with some of its Ka or reverse band transponders it would make sense to put it at 101 where those aren't used...


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Strange email from DirecTV
"Your DIRECTV programming will be interrupted on between 4/18/19 & 4/25/19 followed by the rest of your programming on 12/5/23."

Thoughts? Especially on the apparent 2023 date?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

well, seems to me they don't want to rush … perhaps they made realistic assessment of old equipment in customer's hands...
and ATT don't want spend money for spur the process - decide sitting on their hands and waiting for natural process of falling off old STBs, customers canceling pay DTV, etc


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

James Long said:


> Strange email from DirecTV
> "Your DIRECTV programming will be interrupted on between 4/18/19 & 4/25/19 followed by the rest of your programming on 12/5/23."
> 
> Thoughts? Especially on the apparent 2023 date?


Is that a direct quote from an actual email that DTV sent to multiple customers? Because it's pretty cryptic and not well written. Perhaps it's a re-phrasing based on the email recipient's memory of what the email said?

I mean, what's the distinction between "your DIRECTV programming" and "the rest of your programming"? If you're a DTV customer, isn't it ALL DTV programming? And what's supposed to happen on the latter date (12/5/23)? Just another "interruption"?

I have no faith that AT&T has reliable plans about what they're going to do with any of their services, down to the specific date, over 4 years in the future. So surely that 12/5/23 date is a typo. Even if AT&T were giving advance notice as to when a person's hardware would become unusable (e.g. because of a shutdown in MPEG2 SD transmissions) -- which would certainly be more than just an "interruption" -- would they give them 4.5 years notice? That would only induce complacency, not action, on the customer's part.

Maybe the actual email indicated that MPEG2 SD would cut off on 12/5/19 or sometime between 12/5/19 and 12/23/19? Or maybe there was no actual email. Who knows. Maybe the recipient can copy and paste the full actual text.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

While I can easily believe that last summer's plan to have shut down MPEG2 by the end of 2019 was pushed back, I find it hard to believe they would push it back by four years.

Not to mention that if that's an accurate cut-and-paste of the email telling people "your programming will be interrupted" is pretty cryptic. Assuming that what is really happening is that their locals are going away, why give a date range? It makes it sound like "oh, my Directv is going to be out for a week, then it will come back for four years". WTF?

I didn't think Directv could make this transition any more opaque or needlessly confusing, but they have proven me wrong!


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

that's normal PR move - made info cryptic as possible as it giving them advantage to create big gap for time of real actions, if any action really planned


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I keep hoping for a scanned notice or email. With markets already moving over it appears DIRECTV is avoiding DIRECTV regulars with their notices.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> I keep hoping for a scanned notice or email. With markets already moving over it appears DIRECTV is avoiding DIRECTV regulars with their notices.


All the regulars here got rid of their MPEG2 SD equipment years ago, so Directv won't be notifying them of anything. There are also a lot of MPEG4 only DMAs where they wouldn't notify them until they are ready to shut down the MPEG2 nationals.

I'm in one of those so if I had kept a D10 on my account they'd have no reason to send me a notice yet.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

James Long said:


> Strange email from DirecTV
> "Your DIRECTV programming will be interrupted on between 4/18/19 & 4/25/19 followed by the rest of your programming on 12/5/23."
> 
> Thoughts? Especially on the apparent 2023 date?


My take on it is that they will drop all the SD locals by the 25th and then let the customers slowly migrate in frustration to full HD service in the coming years. I had no doubts that they were not going to just cut the whole SD line in 2019. After the last two quarterly reports they could not afford another mass exodus, especially one that was self inflicted! That would have been really hard to explain to the shareholders.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

dreadlk said:


> My take on it is that they will drop all the SD locals by the 25th and then let the customers slowly migrate in frustration to full HD service in the coming years. I had no doubts that they were not going to just cut the whole SD line in 2019. After the last two quarterly reports they could not afford another mass exodus, especially one that was self inflicted! That would have been really hard to explain to the shareholders.


Dropping SD would hardly be a "mass exodus", they haven't been doing new installs of SD equipment for almost four years now so the only ones are people who have been customers for longer than that.

There can't be a lot of SD customers left anymore, and upgrading the residential ones is pretty simple and won't result in any of them leaving since they are offering free upgrades with no commitment extension. The hard part is commercial types like hotel headends, which the shutdown by DMA appears to have been designed to address, and RVs/boats where a Slimline dish may not be an option space-wise. That latter may be why the 2019 end date was extended.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> they are offering free upgrades with no commitment extension.


there is could be silent ATT twist of DTV hands &#8230; perhaps ATT bean counters don't want such FREE upgrade and do want 2yrs extension ?


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Dropping SD would hardly be a "mass exodus", they haven't been doing new installs of SD equipment for almost four years now so the only ones are people who have been customers for longer than that.
> 
> There can't be a lot of SD customers left anymore, and upgrading the residential ones is pretty simple and won't result in any of them leaving since they are offering free upgrades with no commitment extension. The hard part is commercial types like hotel headends, which the shutdown by DMA appears to have been designed to address, and RVs/boats where a Slimline dish may not be an option space-wise. That latter may be why the 2019 end date was extended.


There are also a lot of customers who have a mix of HD and SD receivers. I still have one SD receiver and the wife uses it. Oddly enough she does not care if picture is in HD or SD. 
This has been the source of a few arguments, so I leave her with it!


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

dreadlk said:


> There are also a lot of customers who have a mix of HD and SD receivers. I still have one SD receiver and the wife uses it. Oddly enough she does not care if picture is in HD or SD.
> This has been the source of a few arguments, so I leave her with it!


Mostly due to my personal prodding, all SD only DIRECTV receivers are long gone from here years ago. But nevertheless have family members as well who don't care whether programs are in HD or SD.

(And therefore needless to say, much less care about 4K).

And what's worse most here hate the matte piller-bars for correctly displaying 4:3 SD content on a 16:9 flat screen and prefer watching in stretch-o-vision.

Man ... SD plus stretch-o-vision, ... Ugh, ... gag ... 

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

dreadlk said:


> There are also a lot of customers who have a mix of HD and SD receivers. I still have one SD receiver and the wife uses it. Oddly enough she does not care if picture is in HD or SD.
> This has been the source of a few arguments, so I leave her with it!


Sure, but if Directv made you replace it and shipped an HD receiver or client to you at no cost or commitment, you wouldn't care nor would she. It isn't like you're at risk of leaving Directv over this.

That type of thing is basically free to Directv, they can send out a refurbished HD receiver for you to swap and don't need to send an installer.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> there is could be silent ATT twist of DTV hands &#8230; perhaps ATT bean counters don't want such FREE upgrade and do want 2yrs extension ?


These people have been off contract for years, they will have been offered free HD upgrades again and again and ignored / turned it down. Probably in a lot of cases because they don't want to be locked in to a two year commitment.

Pretty sure some state AGs would consider it an unacceptable business practice for a company to say "we're changing stuff on our end and you will have to agree to a two year commitment for us to upgrade you". They really don't have a choice other than to make a 'forced' upgrade commitment free.


----------



## dreadlk (Sep 18, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Sure, but if Directv made you replace it and shipped an HD receiver or client to you at no cost or commitment, you wouldn't care nor would she. It isn't like you're at risk of leaving Directv over this.
> 
> That type of thing is basically free to Directv, they can send out a refurbished HD receiver for you to swap and don't need to send an installer.


Oh she cares, she is in the medical field and not all that interested in the latest wizz bang gadgets.
She likes the receiver, feels comfortable with it and is not debating its fate.


----------



## petek157 (May 7, 2019)

Wow... 33 pages. So from what I have gathered, forgive me me, I didn't read all 33 pages, over an uncertain amount of time direct will phase out mpeg2 SD. My question is (apologies if this has been answered in the mix), is there a way to see which of my channels is currently mpeg2 SD vs mpeg4 SD to which I will lose at some point? I like what I have, and want to hold on to it till the bitter end . But at the sometime, Id rather not wake up to watch the morning news in January when its -20 below and have to start changing my dish because the channel was mpeg2 SD.

Thanks in advance


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

If you already have HD service and all of your receivers are HD, there is nothing you need to do so you won't be notified. It's people who still have SD equipment or a mix of HD and SD receivers who are affected. For those who have a mix of SD and HD receivers that involves a receiver swap for their remaining SD receivers, while SD only subscribers will get an appointment for a dish replacement and receiver swap.

Right now the only thing happening in the immediate future is markets who have locals on the 119 location losing their SD locals, along with a migration of the international channels from 119 and 95 to the reverse band. The latest ones happened today with Jacksonville, Lexington, Medford and Springfield MA losing their SD locals, while Laredo and Topeka lost theirs on April 2nd. People were notified via e-mail, phone, snail mail, and an ALERTS channel in their locals range. Provided that your contact info is up to date, you will be notified well in advanced of any changes that affect you.

People who get their SD locals from the 101 slot didn't get notified yet, and the date for the removal of national MPEG2-SD channels from the 101 slot keeps on getting pushed back.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

petek157 said:


> Wow... 33 pages. So from what I have gathered, forgive me me, I didn't read all 33 pages, over an uncertain amount of time direct will phase out mpeg2 SD. My question is (apologies if this has been answered in the mix), is there a way to see which of my channels is currently mpeg2 SD vs mpeg4 SD to which I will lose at some point? I like what I have, and want to hold on to it till the bitter end . But at the sometime, Id rather not wake up to watch the morning news in January when its -20 below and have to start changing my dish because the channel was mpeg2 SD.
> 
> Thanks in advance


There is nothing at all to hold onto until the bitter end. The day DIRECTV sends you a notice about the free upgrade equipment for this change do it. You lose nothing and gain more. Zero reason to wait. Zero.


----------

