# 942/Voom Disapointing News



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

Dishnetwork just announced new Voom 15 channel package for MPEG4 users only!!!
Old customers will remained on 10 currently available. 
Biggest disappointment that Dishnetwork starts pushing MPEG4 this way to the existing customers!!! I hate this company!!!


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

breitling said:


> Dishnetwork just announced new Voom 15 channel package for MPEG4 users only!!!
> Old customers will remained on 10 currently available.
> Biggest disappointment that Dishnetwork starts pushing MPEG4 this way to the existing customers!!! I hate this company!!!


Ok, now calm down. Charlie said the current HD customers would get swapped out on the cheap. Unless he renegs on this, we 942 folk should be ok.


----------



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

LtMunst said:


> Ok, now calm down. Charlie said the current HD customers would get swapped out on the cheap. Unless he renegs on this, we 942 folk should be ok.


Just what I saw - 5 extra VOOM channels for MPEG4 new box users only!!! 
Whoever watching Rushhd channel for sports events could see changes already on Rushhd.com. Notice stated please check worldsprotshd.com for programming changes.
Worldsports - one of the new Voom channels for MPEG4 users. I hate this company!!!!


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

breitling said:


> Just what I saw - 5 extra VOOM channels for MPEG4 new box users only!!!
> Whoever watching Rushhd channel for sports events could see changes already on Rushhd.com. Notice stated please check worldsprotshd.com for programming changes.
> Worldsports - one of the new Voom channels for MPEG4 users. I hate this company!!!!


And again, why do you assume you will not be taken care of? Charlie said in the chat that current HD customers would have an easy upgrade to a new box. What's the problem?


----------



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

LtMunst said:


> And again, why do you assume you will not be taken care of? Charlie said in the chat that current HD customers would have an easy upgrade to a new box. What's the problem?


What do you mean under easy upgrade? I own my box, would this company give me new one for free? I paid $600 and now they restricting me for some channels I wish to watch just because they need to sell new boxes.
What is really new? Same quality 1080i? Why can't I watch same worldsports they have before on rushhd? Dishnetwork sucks!!!


----------



## jsanders (Jan 21, 2004)

The details about how easy it will be to migrate to an MPEG-4 DVR solution are going to be announced at the next Charlie Chat. That is, according to SatelliteGuys.us. Apparently, Charlie told Scott what it was, and to keep his lips shut until the Charlie chat. I'm patient enough to wait a couple of days to find out.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

jsanders said:


> The details about how easy it will be to migrate to an MPEG-4 DVR solution are going to be announced at the next Charlie Chat. That is, according to SatelliteGuys.us. Apparently, Charlie told Scott what it was, and to keep his lips shut until the Charlie chat. I'm patient enough to wait a couple of days to find out.


Is this the same Scott that thought Charlie had told him the HD channels were going to be turned on this past Thursday?

Just curious.


----------



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

jsanders said:


> The details about how easy it will be to migrate to an MPEG-4 DVR solution are going to be announced at the next Charlie Chat. That is, according to SatelliteGuys.us. Apparently, Charlie told Scott what it was, and to keep his lips shut until the Charlie chat. I'm patient enough to wait a couple of days to find out.


What they could tell you? This is MONOPOLY and they usually do whatever they like to do. They don't care about people!!!
Saturday morning, channel 9476, instead of normal for this time sports events (which I was paying money for) I am getting some crap dishnetwork already substituted because of meter above.
I should wait for something for my money? Why are they doing changes and making announcements 2 weeks later? Do they care about customers at all?
Because DISHNETWORK IS FU.. MONOPOLY!!!!


----------



## lakebum431 (Jun 30, 2005)

Do you even know what a monopoly is? There are 2 major home satellite companies out there last time I checked. Additionally, you probably have the option to get cable from at least 1 company. Therefore E* is not a monopoly. You might not like what they are doing right now, but if you are going to complain, at least know what you are complaining about.


----------



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

lakebum431 said:


> Do you even know what a monopoly is? There are 2 major home satellite companies out there last time I checked. Additionally, you probably have the option to get cable from at least 1 company. Therefore E* is not a monopoly. You might not like what they are doing right now, but if you are going to complain, at least know what you are complaining about.


Monopoly = Dishnetwork. Why?

1. Changes without letting people know first, you are paying money in time but doesn't get what you promised or get something else instead.
2. Politics to push you to get new equipment without needs. 
I don't care about MPEG4 and I could record as much as I nee on my 942. I don't need more. MPEG4 - compression which will not change any aspect of quality on your TV. 
3. Stupid packages including 90% of garbage you can't avoid
4. Have nobody to talk on phone, they don't know anything and you should wait for announcements after the facts happened. Tech Support is useless and stupid unless you switched to the 3-4 level above.
5. Most important - YOU HAVE NO CHOISE!!! EAT IT!!!

Why Dish? I am watching international channels which are not on cable normally. SO you might be like them but I don't and I think I have good reasons why.


----------



## Tom in TX (Jan 22, 2004)

HDMe said:


> Is this the same Scott that thought Charlie had told him the HD channels were going to be turned on this past Thursday?
> 
> Just curious.


That's definitely the same Scott! And he was sure wrong about that! And he'll be willing to admit it, I imagine.
But in the last few months, he has provided a wealth of information to Dish subs. I am a member of both sites, and enjoy both sites. I cannot understand the animosity shown by some for him, and granted, the animosity he has shown for some members here. He does a great job, and has members joining his site in great numbers. The folks here at DBSTalk also do a great job. I've received alot of help with my 942.
Why can't we all just get along?
Tom in TX


----------



## JosephF (Apr 23, 2002)

breitling said:


> Monopoly = Dishnetwork. Why?
> 
> 1. Changes without letting people know first, you are paying money in time but doesn't get what you promised or get something else instead.
> 2. Politics to push you to get new equipment without needs.
> ...


None of this has anything to do with a monopoly.

As for #5 you most definitely do have a choice. If they suck so bad leave.

They must not suck completely since apparently they have international channels that you are highly interested in.

As for upgrading product, the eventual MPEG-4 transition was being spoken of before the 942 ever came out. YOU made the choice to buy the 942 even though it was known this would eventually happen. Yes I hope E* comes up with a great upgrade plan, but you made your choices and need to quit blaming everyone else for them.

E* is far from perfect, but then so are D* and cable.


----------



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

JosephF said:


> None of this has anything to do with a monopoly.
> 
> As for #5 you most definitely do have a choice. If they suck so bad leave.


No sheet ... And Microsoft also not a monopoly since you have MAC choice? 
This is called bull sheet, sorry. And this is why people hate them all over the world including US. Open your eyes!!!
Dishnetwork, Verizon (local calls), Microsoft, PSENG, Cablevision etc. - this is all monopoly type of businesses. Why? Because of their business practices and behavior.


----------



## dturturro (Nov 24, 2004)

breitling said:


> No sheet ... And Microsoft also not a monopoly since you have MAC choice?
> This is called bull sheet, sorry. And this is why people hate them all over the world including US. Open your eyes!!!
> Dishnetwork, Verizon (local calls), Microsoft, PSENG, Cablevision etc. - this is all monopoly type of businesses. Why? Because of their business practices and behavior.


The Microsoft/Mac comparison is the worst example you could choose. Microsoft is bigger than Mac. Dish is smaller than DirecTV. And Comcast. And soon to be smaller than Time Warner. I wish I could figure out how to be the 4th largest kid on the block and still have a monopoly


----------



## MarkoC (Apr 5, 2004)

It appears to me that his primary concern is the Spanish soccer league coverage currently on RushHD that will be moved to World Sport HD as of February 1. He may or may not be aware that the rest of the games in January will still be aired on RushHD.

I too am concerned about the shift of this programming to a channel that my current reciever (942) will be unable to recieve as of Feb. 1. Who knows how long it will take to get the current MPEG2 receivers swapped out for the new ones, assuming that an affordable upgrade path is made available. Meanwhile we could miss a lot the remaining soccer games this season.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Tom in TX said:


> That's definitely the same Scott! And he was sure wrong about that! And he'll be willing to admit it, I imagine.
> But in the last few months, he has provided a wealth of information to Dish subs. I am a member of both sites, and enjoy both sites. I cannot understand the animosity shown by some for him, and granted, the animosity he has shown for some members here. He does a great job, and has members joining his site in great numbers. The folks here at DBSTalk also do a great job. I've received alot of help with my 942.
> Why can't we all just get along?
> Tom in TX


I can't speak for everyone else... but I can tell you where my animosity for the other site comes from. Anytime there is a disagreement on this forum, there are certain people who run quickly to the other site and actually feel the need to take the time to post messages insulting people who are on this forum but NOT on that forum, myself included.

I have thick skin and can take it... but find it interesting how many threads I see over on that site when visiting that are discussing people over here... so it left a bad taste in my mouth early on, and while I visit their site as a guest to see what news they have... I do not plan to register there.

Disagreements, even arguments are ok from time to time... and we can all get along... but not when folks go running to another site and use it to discuss folks that aren't on that site. Seems a little childish to me, and that's where my animosity comes from... and why I guess I get a little perverse pleasure whenever things that are posted over there as "breaking news" turn out to be wrong.


----------



## JosephF (Apr 23, 2002)

For me it's not the animosity, it's that there is so much of the "we're the first" or "we're the biggest" bologna going on that I sometimes have a hard time finding the actual discussions.

As far as the topic of this thread, someone still clearly has no clue what a monopoly is. Maybe a basic business/economics course is in order


----------



## Tom in TX (Jan 22, 2004)

HDMe said:


> Anytime there is a disagreement on this forum, there are certain people who run quickly to the other site and actually feel the need to take the time to post messages insulting people who are on this forum but NOT on that forum, myself included.


Yet you can do it to Scott? Two wrongs don't make a right!

And you said: " ... but not when folks go running to another site and use it to 
discuss folks that aren't on that site. Seems a little childish to me, and 
that's where my animosity comes from...

Seems like you are doing the exact same thing. Maybe that's where THEIR animosity comes from. You're right, it is childish. 
Tom in TX


----------



## breitling (Dec 16, 2005)

MarkoC said:


> It appears to me that his primary concern is the Spanish soccer league coverage currently on RushHD that will be moved to World Sport HD as of February 1. He may or may not be aware that the rest of the games in January will still be aired on RushHD.
> 
> I too am concerned about the shift of this programming to a channel that my current reciever (942) will be unable to recieve as of Feb. 1. Who knows how long it will take to get the current MPEG2 receivers swapped out for the new ones, assuming that an affordable upgrade path is made available. Meanwhile we could miss a lot the remaining soccer games this season.


Exactly my point!!! Dishnetwork aware that you might never will get MPEG4 box if they will not push you to do so. 
And they do!!! They don't have any box available yet but they already change whole Voom package, without any letter or announcement before. Who cares, they will show to me KungFu or other crap instead of Barselona and Real Madrid games ... And this is not monopoly? Sure, Microsoft too ...


----------



## dturturro (Nov 24, 2004)

Monopoly means you have NO competition! Go to DirecTV or cable if you hate Dish so much.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Tom in TX said:


> Yet you can do it to Scott? Two wrongs don't make a right!
> 
> And you said: " ... but not when folks go running to another site and use it to
> discuss folks that aren't on that site. Seems a little childish to me, and
> ...


Not the same at all. Those folks do post over here, and people post links here to their site. Whereas I, and many others, don't post over there.

Though to be fair, you are correct in that I shouldn't be doing it even in response to them doing it first. Even though I am doing it because they have done it to me and others first... so I will not post any further slights against the other site even in sarcasm, though if any of them (who are certainly welcome on this site) post here and I can add to the conversation constructively I will reply to their posts here.


----------



## Tom in TX (Jan 22, 2004)

HDMe said:


> so I will not post any further slights against the other site even in sarcasm, though if any of them (who are certainly welcome on this site) post here and I can add to the conversation constructively I will reply to their posts here.


Sounds fair to me! Good attitude. Wish more people had the same idea!
Tom in TX


----------



## Hoxxx (Jun 19, 2004)

I


jsanders said:


> The details about how easy it will be to migrate to an MPEG-4 DVR solution are going to be announced at the next Charlie Chat. That is, according to SatelliteGuys.us. Apparently, Charlie told Scott what it was, and to keep his lips shut until the Charlie chat. I'm patient enough to wait a couple of days to find out.


I HOPE IT IS GOOD NEWS. But I am not going to hold my breath


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Tom in TX said:


> Sounds fair to me! Good attitude. Wish more people had the same idea!
> Tom in TX


Thanks, and I know what you mean. I've agreed with people that I've disagreed with on other topics... and sometimes a person I've argued with in one thread, I agree with in another. It's a lot easier to 'go off' on people in a forum where you can't see each other and its very impersonal so you type mad without actually being mad... sometimes the backspace key can be all of our friends!


----------



## harlock328 (May 4, 2004)

Dish is an Oligopoly or a duopoly (if you don't count other sat providers like canada and such) NOT a monopoly..granted, almost as bad.


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

dturturro said:


> The Microsoft/Mac comparison is the worst example you could choose.


Not to mention Linux and the BSDs


----------



## Rod Williams (Jan 8, 2006)

Hoxxx said:


> I
> 
> I HOPE IT IS GOOD NEWS. But I am not going to hold my breath


Just thought I would mention that a very sure sounding Dish technician told me today that the 942 would be software upgradeable to mpeg4.
Rod


----------



## DanB474 (May 28, 2004)

Rod Williams said:


> Just thought I would mention that a very sure sounding Dish technician told me today that the 942 would be software upgradeable to mpeg4.
> Rod


I'm pretty darn sure this has been discussed over and over, and the 942 is not going to be software upgradeable to MPEG4.:nono2:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

:welcome_s Rod Williams
They sound sure, but they shouldn't be. The hardware inside the 942 CAN NOT HANDLE MPEG4. The software on the ViP622 is reportedly similar to the 942 ... look/feel/function. But without the proper chips inside the box the receiver is NOT going to show MPEG4.

JL


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I've been looking back over the thread and noticed the comments about Scott and SatelliteGuys.us - I missed the comments earlier so I'll reply now.

Please do not bring comments from Scott or SatGuys over to this site. We'd rather see reports from E* or from news sites on DBSTalk - not rumors and speculations. We can do our own rumors and speculation thank-you-very-much.

Also please do not use this forum to put down him or his site. It is a courtesy that we extend to all members, even former members, that personal attacks are not allowed. While I'm not going to judge anything in this thread as a personal attack (or not) the mods here reserve the right to remove or edit posts as needed.

This is DBSTalk - Let's Talk DBS

James Long


----------



## Bill Schultz (Jan 3, 2006)

breitling says that Dish is a monopoly and of course in the strictest sense this is not true. There are other choices; but at what cost?

In my case I have over a thousand dollars worth of their equipment that I would have to replace if I move. And move to what? In my view they're all horrible. They all force you to purchase channels that you'll never watch just get the few that you will watch.

Monopoly? No - but there couldn't be a worse version of a "company store."


----------



## dturturro (Nov 24, 2004)

Those same comments would apply to D* as well. I'm sure some cable co's charge "upgrade" fees that would also fall under your criteria. When you have multiple choices and all are the same that is not a monopoly.

Now if you want to talk collusion...


----------



## kent6723 (Oct 12, 2004)

DanB474 said:


> I'm pretty darn sure this has been discussed over and over, and the 942 is not going to be software upgradeable to MPEG4.:nono2:


If 942 was MPEG4 upgradable via sovtware only, E* would not bring VIP622 which is pratically a 942 clone!

:smoking:


----------



## dturturro (Nov 24, 2004)

They're probably just confusing the "easy" upgrade option Charlie mentioned with an upgrade to the software. The upgrade will be in the form of a box swap accompanied by a fee (as yet to be announced).


----------



## jsanders (Jan 21, 2004)

James Long said:


> Please do not bring comments from Scott or SatGuys over to this site.


Is there anything preventing Scott from posting his views on this site? If I recall, he is user #4 at DBSTalk. I didn't bash him, or promote him for that matter. I referred to what he said, and then suggested we be patient and wait a couple of days for the Charlie chat and judge for ourselves. Furthermore, the aforementioned individual was acting in the capacity as a reporter, interviewing Charlie Ergen at the CES. With that in mind, the comments were really from E*'s CEO. Charlie's comments aren't banned from the site, are they? "Wait for the next Charlie Chat." Not much news, not much rumor, not much speculation there!

Both sites have a large cross section of the same members. I don't see why some people want to pretend each other's site doesn't exist.


----------



## Jeff McClellan (Apr 22, 2002)

I dont think James said you did, if you reread his post he just asked for all of us to keep this thread, topic specific.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

jsanders said:


> Furthermore, the aforementioned individual was acting in the capacity as a reporter, interviewing Charlie Ergen at the CES.


Incorrect. Saying "I've got a secret" isn't reporting. (We've been saying wait until the Charlie Chat - his tease is not new news.) But that's not the point. The he said versus we said games get us nowhere. We are here to talk about DBS.

Thanks for your understanding.

James


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

James Long said:


> Incorrect. Saying "I've got a secret" isn't reporting.
> James


Yeah, I was lurking over there earlier and I keep seeing these posts saying to "Get the latest blockbuster news from CES, please donate to the site and join us in the Pub".

Now they are withholding news unless you pay. :nono2:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We are about six hours from the Charlie Chat ...
We have plenty of on track threads open speculating on what E* will do.
Before this thread gets too far off track I'm going to close it.

Thanks for your comments.

James Long


----------

