# D* new burd is up, maybe they will actually deliver



## kckucera (Aug 1, 2005)

So anybody taking odds that D* can actually get their 100 HD channels up with the new bird launched today?


----------



## Smthkd (Sep 1, 2004)

They will deliver! No doubt! Very Optimistic!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

kckucera, since you're a E* customer maybe you should be asking if E* will be able to match D*s HD channel lineup next year?


----------



## kckucera (Aug 1, 2005)

RAD said:


> kckucera, since you're a E* customer maybe you should be asking if E* will be able to match D*s HD channel lineup next year?


Agree RAD Dish better get a move on


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

DirecTV 5 and 7S tell you all you need to know about promises from HQ.


----------



## convem24 (Mar 11, 2007)

D* got the bird up and yes they should hit the magical 100 number by the end of year. The point is overall is that they now have capacity that E* and the Cable group would give their first child for. I used to be an E* customer but I switched to D* because they will be able to deliver on their HD promise.


----------



## rtk (Apr 15, 2007)

when is Dish's satellite transponder capacity planned to expand


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

convem24 said:


> D* got the bird up and yes they should hit the magical 100 number by the end of year. The point is overall is that they now have capacity that E* and the Cable group would give their first child for. I used to be an E* customer but I switched to D* because they will be able to deliver on their HD promise.


Well I have both so it doesn't matter to me. 

Let them fight it out and I'll turn one off when the other one steps up to the plate.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

rtk said:


> when is Dish's satellite transponder capacity planned to expand


Depends on how you mean that statement.. After the August conversion of Voom's to MPEG4 + the free space they have right now... Dish is estimated to have room for 15-20 new MPEG4 HD channels around that time.

If new satellites go up at the end of the year as announced, then all the capacity discussion becomes moot again... but in the meantime, Dish is covered easily for around 15-20 new HD channels should they launch in that timeframe.


----------



## archer75 (Oct 13, 2006)

Direct TV can't have 100 HD channels by the end of the year. Not enough providers will be putting out that many channels by then. There have been announcements but no where near 100 channels.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

They only promised to have capacity for the channels. They will have that. As far as them having all running full time it will be hard since there are not 100 HD nets available to put on the sats.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

whatchel1 said:


> As far as them having all running full time it will be hard since there are not 100 HD nets available to put on the sats.


Yet, who knows how many on 12/31/07


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

whatchel1 said:


> They only promised to have capacity for the channels. They will have that. As far as them having all running full time it will be hard since there are not 100 HD nets available to put on the sats.


Actually they were stupid enough to refer to a 100 channel service (not capacity but channel count) before backing off and referring to a 100 or 150 channel capacity. They _may_ get there if they count channels that are generally off the air or in SD. 


RAD said:


> Yet, who knows how many on 12/31/07


Not 100. Not unless about 50-60 networks are sandbagging on their announcements and D* adds every HD channel in existence.


----------



## convem24 (Mar 11, 2007)

ssmith10pn said:


> Well I have both so it doesn't matter to me.
> 
> Let them fight it out and I'll turn one off when the other one steps up to the plate.


So why do you have both D* and E*? Not to say that what you are doing is bad but it does seems a little excessive.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

In any case we will see something when September 15th roll around, sooner if possible.


----------



## MAVERICK007 (Aug 30, 2006)

So, from what I understand, I *must *convert to the HR20 to receive the new HD channels prior to September 15th?


----------



## Smthkd (Sep 1, 2004)

Thats what Im talking about!! The point is eventually the channels will come! Better some than none!


----------



## ldmth44 (Dec 15, 2006)

kckucera said:


> So anybody taking odds that D* can actually get their 100 HD channels up with the new bird launched today?


Does it really matter? You wiil keep what you like--a matter of personal preference just like which gasoline you like.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

MAVERICK007 said:


> So, from what I understand, I *must *convert to the HR20 to receive the new HD channels prior to September 15th?


For ALL new HD channels you'll need a MPEG4 receiver (either the H20 or HR20) and the AU-9 or AT-9 Ka/Ku band dish.


----------



## MAVERICK007 (Aug 30, 2006)

RAD said:


> For ALL new HD channels you'll need a MPEG4 receiver (either the H20 or HR20) and the AU-9 or AT-9 Ka/Ku band dish.


Thanks, RAD! Guess I'll have to let my 250 go & finally experience the HR20.:nono2:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

MAVERICK007 said:


> Thanks, RAD! Guess I'll have to let my 250 go & finally experience the HR20.:nono2:


It's really not that bad.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Much of this belongs in the D* forum ... Don't forget where you are!

Please discuss the launch from an E* point of view (or at least something that might be interesting to E* customers).


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

> So why do you have both D* and E*? Not to say that what you are doing is bad but it does seems a little excessive.


2 homes in 2 different markets and I share.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

I read a report recently about some cable industry symposium (?) - don't have the link.

The guys from Comcast, TWC etc seem to take the D* 100 channel threat seriously enough. They were detailing their plans to meet that challenge. 

There also seems to be some kind of consensus that a lot of channels will go HD this year - we have already seen some PR from HBO and Discovery, for eg. After all there has to be some kind of a tipping point when the national channels move to HD - now that 35% of US population has HDTV.


----------



## msmith198025 (Jun 28, 2007)

convem24 said:


> So why do you have both D* and E*? Not to say that what you are doing is bad but it does seems a little excessive.


I also have them both.
My company provides me with the full dish package as a perk, and I pay for Direct for the sports. Not THAT much difference between the two, i like both better in some areas, but would be happy with either one.


----------



## Mikey (Oct 26, 2004)

RAD said:


> For ALL new HD channels you'll need a MPEG4 receiver (either the H20 or HR20) and the AU-9 or AT-9 Ka/Ku band dish.


Same applies to any new HD that E* delivers from now on. Short term, you'll need a ViP MPEG-4 receiver, and you'll need to get a signal from either 129 or 61.5. Long term, you might need a new satellite dish to see two different locations.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I had both services for a while but thaat was before HD.

I would absolutely love to have them both. I like D* overall but it looks like they'll never have Voom, so it sure would nice to have E* as well.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

kckucera said:


> So anybody taking odds that D* can actually get their 100 HD channels up with the new bird launched today?


From my understanding that's mostly compromised of local networks and regional services, and you should only qualify for what you are eligible for. I don't know D*'s exactly promises, but AFAIK there isn't even 100 HD national eligible channels available at this time.

I do believe E* has made a commitment to be the leader in HD. I think they will try very hard to keep that title. In any case, I have had both. I prefer Dish and I'm not going anywhere unless something really revolutionary is introduced.


----------



## msmith198025 (Jun 28, 2007)

Jason Nipp said:


> From my understanding that's mostly compromised of local networks and regional services, and you should only qualify for what you are eligible for. I don't know D*'s exactly promises, but AFAIK there isn't even 100 HD national eligible channels available at this time.
> 
> I do believe E* has made a commitment to be the leader in HD. I think they will try very hard to keep that title. In any case, I have had both. I prefer Dish and I'm not going anywhere unless something really revolutionary is introduced.


While it does include the regional sports networks, the locals arent counted in that number from what i have read.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

D* likes to count a "representative number" of locals in their packages.
Choice - 139 Channels (90 video and 49 audio) 
-> "Over 140 channels including 50 XM Satellite Radio channels."
Choice Xtra - 188 Channels (121 video and 67 audio) 
-> "Over 185 channels including 68 XM Satellite Radio channels."
Premier - 254 Channels (187 video and 67 audio)
-> "Over 250 channels, premium movie channels and sports networks."

Their description for "Choice" only works if you add locals to the count (actual channel counts done my counting named channels on their website).

I can't imagine them not doing the same with HD. Not counting every channel against the 100 but adding four to the count because they carry HD locals to many of their customers. RSNs will be fair to count if/when they go ConUS since D* includes the Sports Pack channels in Premier (even though these are part time channels).

Their ads do have the disclaimer "subject to channel availability". I expect we will begin to see more of the "more _hours_ of HD than any other service" type ads from E* if D* ever gets ahead on raw channel count.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

The general concensus on the D* forums is that locals are not included in the HD count. 

If you count every HD channel D* has or has agreements with, and the RSNs which will go national, and the movie channels that already have HD or that plan to add HD, it is a pretty substantial number. Plus, hopefully there are some channels that will go HD in the specified time frame that we don't know about yet.

I was hoping Voom would be included in the 100, but it increasingly looks like that will not be the case. It wouldn't surpirse me if D*'s excuse for not having 100 national HD channels is that the providers just haven't launched them. However, if they do not carry ALL the HBO HD channels PLUS Voom, then they really have no excuse, and their heart is not really in the "HD Leader" race.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Everyone seems to take advertising to seriously. No one should ever buy something only from what is advertised. With the internet, there are reviews for everything. Cell Phone companies are a good example of stretching the truth. I get dropped calls on Verison in the middle of Kansas City. 

D* used the term channels when they should have used capacity. Probably those at the ad agency did not know the difference. There may even be some on this forum that do not understand the difference. 

Who said they would have unlimited HD capacity? It is all marketing. Those that do better marketing, do better, no matter the quality of the product. Take the BetaMax for instance.

It is the same as the "Big fish story". Ask if it was really that big.


----------



## msmith198025 (Jun 28, 2007)

paulman182 said:


> The general concensus on the D* forums is that locals are not included in the HD count.
> 
> If you count every HD channel D* has or has agreements with, and the RSNs which will go national, and the movie channels that already have HD or that plan to add HD, it is a pretty substantial number. Plus, hopefully there are some channels that will go HD in the specified time frame that we don't know about yet.
> 
> I was hoping Voom would be included in the 100, but it increasingly looks like that will not be the case. It wouldn't surpirse me if D*'s excuse for not having 100 national HD channels is that the providers just haven't launched them. However, if they do not carry ALL the HBO HD channels PLUS Voom, then they really have no excuse, and their heart is not really in the "HD Leader" race.


That is correct. I havent heard a thing about them counting locals, but then I really wouldnt have a problem with them counting each of the networks once. It is actually a channel that they are providing.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

they are separate counts. They claim capacity for 1500 local and 150 national


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

paulman182 said:


> I was hoping Voom would be included in the 100, but it increasingly looks like that will not be the case. It wouldn't surpirse me if D*'s excuse for not having 100 national HD channels is that the providers just haven't launched them. However, if they do not carry ALL the HBO HD channels PLUS Voom, then they really have no excuse, and their heart is not really in the "HD Leader" race.


Didn't E* buy the exclusive rights to broadcast Voom via Satellite?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

No, the Voom package is available to any carrier--but only as the entire package.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Jason Nipp said:


> Didn't E* buy the exclusive rights to broadcast Voom via Satellite?


As far as I am aware, the only thing stopping DirecTV (or anyone else for that matter) from having Voom is themselves. Dish was a natural to pick them up first because of the deal to buy the satellite... but once Voom the service provider went belly-up and they converted to Voom the channel provider, they have always wanted to sell their channels to whomever wanted to pay.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

E* is a heavy investor in Voom ... the exact rules are a guess. So far only Cablevision has announced adding the Voom channels to their own system (other than E*). Cablevision owns the rest of Voom.

If Voom is available to others it's just more profit for the investors. There is some competitive advantage to having the channels (for count as well as content) but it is the other channels that are the lifeblood of HD service.


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

A while back, I remember reading that some DirecTV exec made of point of saying that the Voom channels would _not_ be part of their 100 HD channels, saying something like the channels DirecTV is adding "will actually be compelling". I've not seen Voom, but I have read that while they are HD content, (In a HD starved world) after the initial novelty wears off, they are a bit lackluster in the programming dept. With the choices that are becoming available soon, I'd rather D*'s band width not be spent on such channels.


----------



## kckucera (Aug 1, 2005)

man_rob said:


> I have read that while they are HD content, (In a HD starved world) after the initial novelty wears off, they are a bit lackluster in the programming dept.
> 
> Actually the problem is a lack of material with endless repeats. Equator, Gallery both have interesting shows. Periodically Rush has good extreme sports and if you like old monster and kungfu movies the Monster and KungFu channels are ok. The film festival channel also periodically has good content but not often enough. I pass on the fashion, animation an music channels although the production values on the music channel are pretty good.


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

kckucera said:


> Actually the problem is a lack of material with endless repeats. Equator, Gallery both have interesting shows. Periodically Rush has good extreme sports and if you like old monster and kungfu movies the Monster and KungFu channels are ok. The film festival channel also periodically has good content but not often enough. I pass on the fashion, animation an music channels although the production values on the music channel are pretty good.


Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are good things on Voom, (and it is more HD than D* right now) but overall, the reviews, and remarks here say that it's not all that interesting. With all the new HD channels that are about to come on line, Voom would be very low on my wish list of channels. Who know's maybe Voom will get better in the face of the new competition, otherwise E should consider dumping them for some more dynamic channels.


----------



## kckucera (Aug 1, 2005)

man_rob said:


> E should consider dumping them for some more dynamic channels.


Well I certainly would trade all of VOOM for SciFi, FX and Bravo, and BBC


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

The point is, when it comes to counting channels, D* may very well need Voom to be able to reach their numerical goal.

They will have the bandwidth to spare, expecially after the next sat goes up. The idea is, not Voom instead of Sci-Fi, or instead of FX, or instead of anything. "In addition to..." is the ideal situation. And it would certainly be a big boost for Voom to be available from D*.

But as someone posted, D* seems to not be interested.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

D* slammed them when there was no chance of getting them.
If D* adds them I'm sure they will be the best channels ever.


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

James Long said:


> D* slammed them when there was no chance of getting them.
> If D* adds them I'm sure they will be the best channels ever.


When was there no chance of D* getting them?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Many of the things wrong with the Voom channels are also wrong with other HD national channels right now. A&E doesn't have much actual HD on its channel, so how compelling is it? HDNet and HDNet Movies repeat things a lot, though they do rotate in new content every month or so.. but I note the Towering Inferno is airing on HDNet this month and it was airing way back when I first upgraded to HD with Dish... so the more things change, the more they stay the same.

If it was a choice of Voom or SciFi, USA, whatever... I'd probably rather have SciFi and USA too... BUT those channels don't exist... and by the time they do, Dish is going to have additional bandwidth to add them... so I really don't see where there is going to be a problem.

If Dish canned the Voom 15-pack of channels tomorrow... there aren't 15 full time HD channels they could add to take their place... so folks that think we are getting Voom instead of something better should re-evaluate.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

man_rob said:


> When was there no chance of D* getting them?


When they were first released and D* didn't have a decent HD service. That time period may be coming to an end as far as available bandwidth, but the actual contract between E* and Rainbow Media is unknown.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

kckucera said:


> Well I certainly would trade all of VOOM for SciFi, FX and Bravo, and BBC


Why would you trade 15 channels that exist for four that don't?


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

James Long said:


> When they were first released and D* didn't have a decent HD service. That time period may be coming to an end as far as available bandwidth, but the actual contract between E* and Rainbow Media is unknown.


While it's cool that Voom was there to fill an HD void, soon, _very soon_, that void will no longer exist. I'd still say I'd rather D* wait for the newer channels, than to use up band width with a contract with Voom.

It's sort of like the patience test they give children, "You can have 5 M&M's now, or if you wait 5 minutes, you'll get the whole bag." Then they leave the 5 candies in front of the child, to see if they understand the concept of delayed, or deferred gratification.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

There may be an HD void for some time if we must fill 100 (or 150) national channels, and that's what D* will have to do to silence all its critics.

I've learned to take the 5 M&Ms now. The promised "whole bag" could melt in the next five minutes. Heck, all the chocolate I've eaten over the last 49 years could catch up with me in the next five minutes...


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

Then I'll guess we'll see in 5 minutes.


----------



## Jhon69 (Mar 28, 2006)

Will D* deliver?.Well let's see,SW1&2,D9s,D10&11&12.Hmmm,Could be?


----------

