# New HD channels?



## muscles4life70 (Sep 13, 2007)

Does anyone know of any actual dates that E* is coming out with more HD programming and what channels they might be? I really am looking forward to the day Spike is HD. Thank you

Whoops, I should have posted this in the HD forum, sorry. Maybe a mod could move this.


----------



## CoriBright (May 30, 2002)

More? We've just got a whole lot. Let's not be too greedy or Dish won't like us. Give them a few months rest at least.


----------



## muscles4life70 (Sep 13, 2007)

CoriBright said:


> More? We've just got a whole lot. Let's not be too greedy or Dish won't like us. Give them a few months rest at least.


Just was curious, since D* is going to be at about 100 HD channels now and E* has about 38. They might lose customers if it's going to be awhile to catch up. Don't get me wrong, I just switched to E* and have no regrets. I just want some of the HD channels that D* just received. I am willing to wait, for how long I'm not sure. After watching HD for a couple of weeks now, it's just hard to watch SD.


----------



## mspace (Mar 19, 2007)

muscles4life70 said:


> Just was curious, since D* is going to be at about 100 HD channels now and E* has about 38. They might lose customers if it's going to be awhile to catch up. Don't get me wrong, I just switched to E* and have no regrets. I just want some of the HD channels that D* just received. I am willing to wait, for how long I'm not sure. After watching HD for a couple of weeks now, it's just hard to watch SD.


Hold your horses...D* hasn't seen anything yet, only hype. Wait til the 19th and then we will know just how many channels they have.


----------



## Marriner (Jan 23, 2006)

E* = HD channels
D* = HD channels + promises of 100's more
what is the old saying? A bird in the hand......


----------



## allen98311 (Jan 19, 2006)

Did D* ever say that they would have 100 HD channels by the end of the year? All the ads that I have seen say they would have a 100 HD channel capacity by the end of the year.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

allen98311 said:


> Did D* ever say that they would have 100 HD channels by the end of the year? All the ads that I have seen say they would have a 100 HD channel capacity by the end of the year.


An initial release referred to 100 HD channels --- not capacity but channels. They quickly stepped back to "capacity" but the "100 HD Channel Package" is not dead.

They may get 100 HD channels by the end of the year ... E* currently has 70 HD channels ... although 18 are RSNs (game only) and 9 are PPV. If D* pads their count you can be sure that E* will follow suit!


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

allen98311 said:


> Did D* ever say that they would have 100 HD channels by the end of the year? All the ads that I have seen say they would have a 100 HD channel capacity by the end of the year.


Yes. In their financial conf call. 70 by end of Q3 and 100 by EOY.


----------



## mspace (Mar 19, 2007)

nataraj said:


> Yes. In their financial conf call. 70 by end of Q3 and 100 by EOY.


In their channel lineup I only count 36 by end of Sep and 57 by end of OCT. What are the other channels?

http://www.weaknees.com/new-directv-hd-stations.php?code=153428


----------



## CoriBright (May 30, 2002)

mspace said:


> In their channel lineup I only count 36 by end of Sep and 57 by end of OCT. What are the other channels?
> 
> http://www.weaknees.com/new-directv-hd-stations.php?code=153428


I think that's the question everyone is asking. No one can just produce an HD channel for transmission if it doesn't exist! I'm sure we're all hoping things like Spike, Speed, HistInt, BBCA, SciFi etc go HD eventually but is the content really there. Upconverted SD isn't really HD in most folks' eyes.

From my own Favorites list, I'd like Bio, HistInt, BBCA, USA, Court and MSNBC. But in Charlie's mind, is it "compelling content"? But first I'd like my Las Vegas locals in HD on E*. I know satellites don't come cheap and I'd happy we have so many right now.


----------



## zlensman (Jan 15, 2006)

muscles4life70 said:


> Does anyone know of any actual dates that E* is coming out with more HD programming and what channels they might be?


It seems that Dish doesn't like to give out dates until they have a signed agreement for carriage. What we have seen is that we get dates no more than a few weeks in advance. I think this is a good policy compared with making promises that might not be kept.

As for what programming will be next in HD, you can start with those on the upcoming list from DirecTV that are not available anywhere yet. If DirecTV starts broadcasting these channels, there will be pressure for Dish to carry them, too. Competition is good, or as Austin Powers would say, "Yeah capitalism!"

Even if some of these channels are SD upconverts, it's a good start. The new national simulcasts that we have recently gotten -- A&E, TLC, HIST, etc. -- are not all-HD all-the-time. But, like the networks that broadcast in DTV OTA, at least they are all digital and sometimes HD.

What I would like to know is why we haven't heard from Charlie/E* either:

1) We are working for carriage of the national HD channels that D* is promising that we don't have, or
2) The channels that D* is promising in HD are not planning to broadcast in HD, so they can only be upconverts​


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Charlie has promised to remain the leader in HD and he has stated that he had doubts that D* could reach the much touted 100 HD mark by the end of the year.

While not specifically saying what you asked him to say, he is basically saying the same thing.


----------



## sdague (Jan 19, 2007)

Honestly, have watching the squish-o-vision History Channel last night for 30 seconds, I'm really not interested in E putting up any upconverted and stretched content from their side.

Plus D* has been really careful with their wording of "up to 100 channels". Make sure to read the fine print.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

mspace said:


> In their channel lineup I only count 36 by end of Sep and 57 by end of OCT. What are the other channels?
> 
> http://www.weaknees.com/new-directv-hd-stations.php?code=153428


50 channels of color bars.


----------



## archer75 (Oct 13, 2006)

sdague said:


> Honestly, have watching the squish-o-vision History Channel last night for 30 seconds, I'm really not interested in E putting up any upconverted and stretched content from their side.


You can only broadcast what those stations provide you. So much content out there isn't in HD and has to be upconverted. Not dish's fault.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

And, specifically with History HD, there is an issue with the channel provider where they cannot deliver the HD that was there last week. They will get back to normal good HD as soon as they can.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

mspace said:


> In their channel lineup I only count 36 by end of Sep and 57 by end of OCT. What are the other channels?


Ofcourse D* is dependant on content providers - and to the extent they delay (or D* can claim they delayed) - they can get away with it. It is also interesting that E* stated that they now have 70 channels ...

From what I see - looks like D* will have some 3 to 5 new channels not on E* by the month end.



James Long said:


> Charlie has promised to remain the leader in HD and he has stated that he had doubts that D* could reach the much touted 100 HD mark by the end of the year.


I guess we will see some creative counting on both sides in the future. Throw in whatever you got - RSNs, PPVs and Locals and see where that takes you.


----------



## muscles4life70 (Sep 13, 2007)

zlensman said:


> Even if some of these channels are SD upconverts, it's a good start. The new national simulcasts that we have recently gotten -- A&E, TLC, HIST, etc. -- are not all-HD all-the-time. But, like the networks that broadcast in DTV OTA, at least they are all digital and sometimes HD.


I agree, at least it's a step up from SD. It's just so hard to switch from a HD to a SD channel.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

nataraj said:


> It is also interesting that E* stated that they now have 70 channels ...


Please keep in mind... No one has been able to provide proof that Dish said they have 70 HD channels. An article on the 'net has reported that someone at Dish may have said this... but nothing from Dish (press releases or advertising or their own Web site) has counted up to 70 HD channels.

Whereas DirecTV has advertised 100 HD channels (then changed their ads to say "capacity")... and now "up to" qualifiers... Dish has not, as yet, said they havd 70 HD channels. Someone else has made this count and made the claim.


----------



## mspace (Mar 19, 2007)

HDMe said:


> Please keep in mind... No one has been able to provide proof that Dish said they have 70 HD channels.


Here is where I found it

http://www.tvpredictions.com/echo70091307.htm


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Yep ... that is where SOMEONE ELSE said E* has 70 channels.
It isn't E* saying they have 70 channels.

In other words: Swanni says 70, not Charlie. 

The press release Swanni based his story on says 39.
http://www.dishnetwork.com/downloads/pdf/about_us/press_room/Big10.pdf
"_The leader in high-definition, DISH Network offers 39 national HD channels including NFL Network HD and ESPN HD, as well as HD local channels in more than 50 percent of U.S. households._"


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

As per usual swanni is the "cutting edge" source. He's so good at this. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

James Long said:


> In other words: Swanni says 70, not Charlie.


Wow. I didn't think anyone would report in such a way that we would have to believe it was a direct quote.



> EchoStar: We Have 70 HDTV Channels!





> The company's rivals are likely to discount EchoStar's claim of 70 HD channels ...


The above quotes - by any journalistic standard - means the 70 channels is a direct claim by E*. Shame on Swanni. :nono2:


----------



## zlensman (Jan 15, 2006)

The whole business of counting HD channels and the alleged statement of 70 channels from E* was hashed out in this thread:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=98649

After reading through that, I've come to this conclusion about trying to count total HD channels for either provider: that way madness lies.

Still, I am curious about how DirecTV counts to 100. On their website, they claim "Up to 100 ... national channels in HD by the end of the year". What does "up to" mean in this context? I assume that "national channels" means anything that's not an LiL. Yet when I look at the programming listed at that same website, I don't get a count of 100, or even 70.

As mentioned in that other thread, counting PPV and RSN channels is dubious. And further complicating an oranges-to-oranges comparison is that DirecTV HDs are tiered and so are Dish HDs, but not in the same way. Also, Premiums in HD only come with entire premium packs, not individually. Opinions differ on how to count Voom channels. And so on.

So while the big corporations argue about the HD totals (or not), I suggest we create a table that is more useful for comparison. Pardon the crude 1st draft since I don't know the markups for tables:


```
Dish Network      DirecTV       Comments
                       ============      =======       ========
HD Cablenets                16             ??          Not broken out by tiers
HD Premiums                  4             ??          HBO, Max, Starz, Sho
HD Proprietary              15             ??          Dish: Voom, DirecTV: ??
HD PPV                       9             ??          May show the same movie
HD RSN                      18             ??          Not all avail. to any cust.
HD Locals            (Up to) 4             ??          Depends on location.
```
Yuck, what a mess! I also don't know the right numbers or comments, but you get the idea.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Of course if we use the "up to" qualifier, then any number is technically accurate.

Dish has up to 1 million HD channels!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I've posted a note over in the DirecTV thread about what Swanni says. It is bad that E* is getting tagged for a comment they have never made. E*'s count is 39.

Counting HD is a lot like counting SD. There are always those that want to "uncount" a few channels (audio, shopping and religious channels are the usual targets of these "uncounters"). When one compares D*'s Choice (140 channels for $49.99) against AT200 (211 channels for $47.99 w/locals) there is always a question of how many of those channels are "real".

Real is in the mind of the counter ... But as long as one company counts all of their audio, shopping and religious channels I don't begrudge the other company from doing the same. If you don't like audio channels being counted yell at D* ... they started it! 

So now we present numbers with caveats ... just like zlensman is suggesting for HD. The comparison becomes Choice ($49.99 for 91 video and 49 audio channels) vs AT200 ($47.99 w/locals for 115 video and 96 audio).

We could break out the HDs by resolution or by unique content. Here's the numbers I have for E*:
13 "HD Versions of Standard Channels" (14 counting BTN if it remains national - Note that this includes upconvert and simulcast channels as well as HGTV and Food that have a separate HD program schedule.)
6 "Additional HD Only Channels" (24/7 HD - no SD version including HDNet, HDNet Movies, Disc HD Theatre, Universal, Golf/Versus and MHD)
15 "24/7 HD - specialty" channels (Voom)
4 "HD Premiums" (HBO, Show, Starz, Cinemax)
= 39 "national channels" (with BTN counted)

Adding the 9 PPVs, 18 RSNs and 4 BTN Alts gets one to 70 HD channels. I don't count PPVs/RSNs and alts in my SD counts - so I won't count them as HDs.

The "upconvert/simulcast" category is the one I see growing the fastest ... with many channels not being in true HD 24/7 and no "new" content (just the SD content in higher resolution).


----------



## norton54 (Feb 2, 2006)

Except for a few channels, the HD conterparts do not look at all different to me so I don't get what all the hype about getting all the stations in HD is about. It look like most of the programming is still taped and shown in SD even though it might be broadcast on a HD station.


----------



## bairdjc (Sep 22, 2005)

true HD (native) > upconvert SD > SD
I wouldn't consider upconverted SD REAL HD although it does seem better (ever watched a regular DVD with a regular DVD player vs. an upconverted version?)


----------



## blarg (Apr 15, 2007)

if you add up all the local HD channels available in various markets, I'm pretty sure that both D* and E* are pushing 100 HD channels already...nowhere does it say that you would have access to all of them.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

The local channels are by deffiniton not natioanl HD channels. The 100 are to be national HD channels.


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

Buckle your seatbelt folks this ride is gonna get bumpy.



> DirecTV's HDTV plans under threat
> Chris Forrester
> 
> DirecTV-10, a new satellite launched in July, has problems which will affect the broadcaster's HDTV plans.
> ...


http://www.rapidtvnews.com/default....ubname=&pform=&sc=1966&hn=rapidtvnews&he=.com


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Looks like something that might affect the LIL plans ... but *NOT* their "100 HD Channel" package. This doesn't take them off the hot seat for delivering that package.


----------



## norton54 (Feb 2, 2006)

Wind_River said:


> I think the hype is for those of us who DO see a *SIGNIFICANT *difference with HD broadcasts. Sorry that your television (or your eyes) don't let you see the difference.


I can tell a difference on some stuff, say a football game that is broadcast in HD but most shows I see NO difference between the channels since most shows are shot in SD anyway. I don't see any difference in this so called up-convert B/S which I think is a bunch of marketing hype.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

norton54 said:


> I can tell a difference on some stuff, say a football game that is broadcast in HD but most shows I see NO difference between the channels since most shows are shot in SD anyway. I don't see any difference in this so called up-convert B/S which I think is a bunch of marketing hype.


I'm sorry, but even SD shows on HD channels show considerable improvement, unless "the problem is in your set."

I might have said the same thing before my cataract surgery, so that's another possible issue.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

norton54 said:


> I can tell a difference on some stuff, say a football game that is broadcast in HD but most shows I see NO difference between the channels since most shows are shot in SD anyway. I don't see any difference in this so called up-convert B/S which I think is a bunch of marketing hype.


Yeah if you don't see a difference, then something is wrong with your TV. Ask someone who actually knows about HD and setup to help you out (this does not include the people a CC or BB).


----------



## Lincoln6Echo (Jul 11, 2007)

norton54 said:


> I can tell a difference on some stuff, say a football game that is broadcast in HD but most shows I see NO difference between the channels since most shows are shot in SD anyway. I don't see any difference in this so called up-convert B/S which I think is a bunch of marketing hype.


Well, I'd also check to see what your receiver is set to in the HDTV set-up menu. It could actually be set at 480p, which it is at default when you first get it.

But in any case, even up-converted SD stuff on an HD channel is better than the non-upconverted SD stuff on the standard SD channel.


----------



## norton54 (Feb 2, 2006)

The receiver is set to 1080i and my tv is a tube HD Toshiba. Must be my eyes.


----------

