# Comcast Announces More the 1,000 HD Choices



## garys (Nov 4, 2005)

Looks like Comcast has gone to counting programs/movies and not channels.

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/20...t_hd_content_anytime_anywhere_well_almost.php


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

yes, we've had this discussion in the past .. Comcast counts individual VOD programs as part of their "count" .. It doesn't change the fact that Comcast is not on my list of "Doug Friendly" companies.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Well, if it isn't Doug friendly, then I won't go to it either. Thanks Doug...BTW, when are you publishing your list of Doug Friendly companies?


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

smiddy said:


> Well, if it isn't Doug friendly, then I won't go to it either. Thanks Doug...BTW, when are you publishing your list of Doug Friendly companies?


DIRECTV is on that list ..


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

...another chapter in the continuing saga of Comcrap deceptive advertising.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Not so much deceptive, as it may just be confusing to some peeps who cannot yet get their brains wrapped around this and begin to think in terms of program _'choices'_ instead of channels. You don't watch a channel, you watch a program. Something I've noticed as a Comcast sub with VOD, is that I have many more HD program 'choices' than I would have with any sat subscription.

For example, while at any given time you may have ±100 or so HD channels from which to choose a program to watch, I actually have upwards of 1,000* HD program 'choices', most of which, because they are VOD, start on my schedule, not on some network's schedule.

*I haven't actually counted, but there's a ton (a very large number) of them.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Nick said:


> Not so much deceptive, as it may just be confusing to some peeps who cannot yet get their brains wrapped around this and begin to think in terms of program _'choices'_ instead of channels. You don't watch a channel, you watch a program. Something I've noticed as a Comcast sub with VOD, is that I have many more HD program 'choices' than I would have with any sat subscription.
> 
> For example, while at any given time you may have ±100 or so HD channels from which to choose a program to watch, I actually have upwards of 1,000* HD program 'choices', most of which, because they are VOD, start on my schedule, not on some network's schedule.
> 
> *I haven't actually counted, but there's a ton (a very large number) of them.


HD programs (VOD or on the channel live) are delivered by the channel provider, regardless. You either watch Mythbusters live on the channel or get it VOD. Same program either way, offered by both providers. With DVRs VOD is becoming moot. If provider X has the same channels as provider Y then it can be said that both providers have the same number of programs. However, provider Y is DirecTV which has been counting channels with the rest of the industry for years. Comcast can't catch up so they count program choices. Gimme a break, if they had the same number of channels they'd be counting channels too. But they don't. So they won't. Discussion over.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

tcusta00 said:


> ...Gimme a break, if they had the same number of channels they'd be counting channels too. But they don't. So they won't. Discussion over.


The discussion won't be over until the sat fanboys wake up and realize that 1,000 choices is better than 100 channels. It's so obvious to me that I wonder why can't you see that. Step back from the Koolaid stand and look at the bigger picture.

It's not the number of channels, it the number of choices. Get over channels counts -- in your world, 1 channel = 1 choice; in my world, 1 channel = hundreds and hundreds of choices. No contest!

...and no, the discussion is _not_ over!


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Pot meet kettle. You're on a satellite site, BTW. 

If there's 10 choices on each channel and there's 100 channels that's the same as 1000 choices isn't it?  Oh but wait, we all know there's much more than 10 choices on most of the 100+ channels offered in HD by DirecTV. It's so obvious to me that I wonder why you can't see that. :scratchin


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

tcusta00 said:


> Pot meet kettle. You're on a satellite site, BTW.


Yes,I know. I've been aware of that since 2002. Did you overlook the fact that it was one of your fellow sat subs that started this thread? :lol:


> Originally Posted by *tcusta00*
> If there's 10 choices on each channel and there's 100 channels that's the same as 1000 choices isn't it?  Oh but wait, we all know there's much more than 10 choices on most of the 100+ channels offered in HD by DirecTV. It's so obvious to me that I wonder why you can't see that. :scratchin


Obviously, you're still confused :scratchin so let me try to explain using simpler concepts:

YOU: You have HD 100 channels and you want to sit down to watch a program at 8:00 tonight. At that time, you have 100 choices.

ME: I have about 50 HD 'channels' + 1,000 HD VOD 'choices', all from Comcast. I want to sit down to watch an HD program at 8:00 tonight. At that time I'll have 1,050 choices. In addition, I have three dual-tuner HD DVRs capable of recording hundreds more HD programs, six at a time!

Do the math -- it's an _embarrassment_ of HD riches!


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Nick said:


> Yes,I know. I've been aware of that since 2002. Did you overlook the fact that it was one of your fellow sat subs that started this thread? :lol: Obviously, you're still confused :scratchin so let me try to explain using simpler concepts:
> 
> YOU: You have HD 100 channels and you want to sit down to watch a program at 8:00 tonight. At that time, you have 100 choices.
> 
> ...


I'm happy that I know how to operate a DVR to get whichever of the thousands (with an "s") of choices I have _whenever _I want. :sure:

I'm glad you're happy with Comcast. And Dish. :shrug:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Nick said:


> Not so much deceptive, as it may just be confusing ....


No....its deceptive. Its intended to both misrepresent their capacity (which is less than both DirecTV and Dish for that matter).

Since they have only about 40 actual HD channels to offer, and little chance of boosting that up nationally for some time...they can't compete in the same space.

So their marketing people got together and put a new "spin" on what they offer - VOD HD programs. DirecTV can do HD VOD too. It is not the same, and Comcrap knows it.

Its designed to fool those who don't know the difference. Since Comcrap knows they are doing this, it is deceptive....ie...the intent to deceive.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Show me a company that doesn't have some type of deceptive advertising and I'll so you a company that went bankrupt. DirecTVs 130 HD channels, 30 of them being PPV, that not deceptive? But the usual DirecTV Fan Boy come back line to that is 'Well they are HD channels, so they should be counted'. Well Comcast's 1000 HD choices are choice and they should be counted too. Over the past few years, DirecTV has had some of the sleaziest advertising I have ever seen. All Comcast is doing is adverting what they offer, and showing people they do offer more HD then DirecTV at any given time.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> Show me a company that doesn't have some type of deceptive advertising and I'll so you a company that went bankrupt.


As usual you're wrong. This is not only a cynical view of the world, it's not true.



Steve Mehs said:


> DirecTVs 130 HD channels, 30 of them being PPV, that not deceptive? But the usual DirecTV Fan Boy come back line to that is 'Well they are HD channels, so they should be counted'. Well Comcast's 1000 HD choices are choice and they should be counted too. Over the past few years, DirecTV has had some of the sleaziest advertising I have ever seen. All Comcast is doing is adverting what they offer, and showing people they do offer more HD then DirecTV at any given time.


All this thread is about is just that their ad is misleading and deceptive. It's also decidedly more misleading than any other ad campaign about HD that I've seen. DirecTV _does _have 130 HD channels. The industry has _always_ advertised _channels_ as opposed to _choices_ and all of a sudden cable gets trumped by satellite and they decide to rewrite the playbook. For *decades *people have chosen their TV provider by how many _channels_ are offered. Go back to the 80s (or ask your mom about it if you don't remember) and it was all about how many channels. No one counted _choices._ It's a joke.

I'm glad you're happy with Comcast, too, Steve. To each his own.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

This needs to be explained not argued. I suppose they are claiming they can somehow send you on demand movies or archived programming in contrast to individual named 'channels'. 

--- CHAS


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> As usual you're wrong. This is not only a cynical view of the world, it's not true.


So every single advertisement, radio, TV, internet, newspaper/magazine ad, is 100% truthful, does not misrepresent anything in anyway at all. There is no lying by omission, no playing with words or anything else. Oh yeah except for the evil Comcast...errr...Wait I have to act like a two year old when referring to them, I mean Comcrap. (Yay I'm so like cool now)

Don't kid yourself you are usually wrong but you are too blind to see. You've been wrong so many times I've lost count, but your too glazed over by DirecTV so I don't bother anymore. Maybe it's time for the industry to change. Not everything stays the same forever. Comcast was thinking outside of the box. Maybe it's time to start counting choices, and who are you to say otherwise? I knew you'd defend DirecTV counting PPV channels, because the almighty DirecTV is so damn perfect and awesome in every way shape and form.

Oh and I don't live in a Comcast area, I'm with Slime Warner. God I can't wait for in two or three months when my area gets all the HD channels they have in NYC. ~110 real HD channels, no PPV, no distant nets, no ~25 OOM RSNs that are blacked out for anything that matters.



> For decades people have chosen their TV provider by how many channels are offered. Go back to the 80s (or ask your mom about it if you don't remember) and it was all about how many channels


Actually wouldn't it be what channels are offered, not how many channels are offered? Only an idiot would choose a service blindly like that. If you had an HDTV and you primarily watched two channels, and just for examples sake, lets say these channels were The Travel Channel and ESPN U, why would you chose DirecTV with their 962 HD channels when they don't offer them in HD. Number of channels don't mean jack if they don't have your favorites.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Anyone who thinks that Comcast has not intentionally marketed this HD content fluff is niave at the least.

As for comparing apples to apples....

Comcrap 40 HD channels, DirecTV 130 (yes, PPC channels are still *channels*).

As for HD programs....I guess its time to start counting the HD offerings on the DirecTV VOD list if it really matters.

There's a huge difference between X number of HD channels and x number of VOD HD programs. The channels offer more selection in real-time programming overall. VOD is archived programming. There are other differences, but in the end....it still comes down to the marketing ploy by Comcrap to fool the uniformed public (to divert attention from their lack of HD channels).

Ther Comcrap marketing program on all this should be called the P T Barnum advertising plan.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Okay, DirecTV lover. Question for you. On Time Warner I have no HD PPV channels, PPV has been replaced by the HD Movies On Demand channel and it's been like that for years, same concept as PPV. New movies for $3.95 in HD. Right now there is a selection of 58 HD movies. Same movies as DirecTV currently has available for the most part, including Iron Man, 21, Leatherheads, the new Prom Night and more. If DirecTV can count those 30 channels of PPV, why can't I count my 58 selections. The content is the same, it's just a different presentation. 1 quarter or two dimes and a nickel. If that's not a vaild comparison, then in your opinion, if I actually had 58 individual channels, one for each movie, would that be more valid, and why, even though actual content is the same.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Okay, DirecTV lover. Question for you. On Time Warner I have no HD PPV channels, PPV has been replaced by the HD Movies On Demand channel and it's been like that for years, same concept as PPV. New movies for $3.95 in HD. Right now there is a selection of 58 HD movies. Same movies as DirecTV currently has available for the most part, including Iron Man, 21, Leatherheads, the new Prom Night and more. If DirecTV can count those 30 channels of PPV, why can't I count my 58 selections.


OK Cable Lover....yes, I guess that's how one could count it....

Of course people can always see things they way they choose to see them...which is not always reality, but that's where the term "to each his own" came from.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

I'm seeing it with logic and reason, you are seeing it with DirecTV sun glasses on while drinking a cup of DirecTV KoolAid. Arguing this is pointless, DirecTV sheeple are programmed to believe their service is God's gift and everything they do is right and what they say goes.

Repeat after me, DirecTV is always right, DirecTV is always right, DirecTV is always right,


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> I'm seeing it with logic and reason, you are seeing it with DirecTV sun glasses on while drinking a cup of DirecTV KoolAid. Arguing this is pointless, DirecTV sheeple are programmed to believe their service is God's gift and everything they do is right and what they say goes.
> 
> Repeat after me, DirecTV is always right, DirecTV is always right, DirecTV is always right,


I guess if some people choose to buy the Cable Voodoo marketing hype, that's OK.

Cable junkies regularly try to talk themselves into how great it is that they pay more for less.

I'm not so gullable...and can't be fooled so easily.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> I'm seeing it with logic and reason, you are seeing it with DirecTV sun glasses on while drinking a cup of DirecTV KoolAid. Arguing this is pointless, DirecTV sheeple are programmed to believe their service is God's gift and everything they do is right and what they say goes.
> 
> Repeat after me, DirecTV is always right, DirecTV is always right, DirecTV is always right,


I'm not a droid, I'm not a droid, I'm not a droid. I also dislike the argument of Comcast vs Directv Vs Dish Network. There is room for all of them plus Charter in the US


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Nice try but, I'm paying about the same for Time Warner as I would for DirecTV, with equal offerings. DirecTV would be cheaper if they didn't charge you twice for the same programming (aka the HD Access fee). DirecTV offers a lot more SD channels, I only have 2 religious channels, and 4 shopping channels with TW, so right there DirecTV wins hands down. Sure I'm missing about 25 real HD channels, most of which I should have in the coming months. But all I really want are additional premium movie channels in HD and Crime and Investigation Channel HD. I don't need marketing hype, I've had Dish Network, I've had DirecTV and I've had Time Warner. Time Warner, while not perfect, (see I can admit that) beats the hell out of the other two.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Nice try but, ....Time Warner, while not perfect, (see I can admit that) beats the hell out of the other two.


Say no more. That perhaps explains things more clearly.

My brother has TWC and crys himself to sleep over the lousy HD every night. He crys because *he's *seen my DirecTV and *he* knows and *he* repeated says how grossly inferior *his* service is, and how *he* DOES pay more for it to boot.

I just saw it myself firsthand this past week, while visiting in the Midwest. Yup...he was right - the very limited HD choices sucked. His DVR locked up twice in just 1 day. Yeah - quality service indeed. 

But that's OK...they need customers too.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

all of this argueing about who is best, or has the most, or is the cheapest, etc. has wakened the old ones.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Just because he has a lousy HD selection and pays more, doesn't mean it's like that all over. I have 53 HD channels with more on tap, and as I posted a few days ago here is my pricing break down for everything with two HD DVRs:



> DirecTV: Premier $104.99, HD Access $9.99, HD Extra $4.99, Additional Receiver Fee, $4.99, DVR fee $5.99, Total $135.95.
> 
> Time Warner: DIGIPIC 4000 $99.75, Encore $3.00, HD Tier $4.95, Sports Tier $1.95, Digital Terminal/Remote Lease Fee $7.45, 1st DVR Fee $9.95, 2nd DVR Fee $7.95, Total, $135.00.
> 
> There is the franchise fee which is $4.30something, but that would be negated by the $5 more I'd have to pay for Road Runner, since I'd be losing the bundling discount.


You know DirecTVs pricing structure, you can verify my TW pricing by calling the number on the line up. My HD DVRs have never locked up or randomly rebooted or even missed a recoding. What's it's now been twice that all DirecTV DVRs froze up nationwide. No outages when it rains, don't have to go out and sweep the dish off in the winter, no outages period except 2 on my end, and a 10 minute outage once at 1AM for system maintenance. All the channels I want, at a competitive price with 99.9% reliability and uptime, and excellent customer service the few times I've need it. And excellent picture quality. Never compared D* HD to TW HD side by side, but I did do A/B comparisons of SD. Here Time Warners SD picture quality wins hands down especially on the premium channels. Much less pixelation on TW. I can't complain.

Sure I have less HD channels, but they will be added and pretty much all the ones I care about I already have and thing else is just a bonus.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> Just because he has a lousy HD selection and pays more, doesn't mean it's like that all over. I have 53 HD channels with more on tap, and as I posted a few days ago here is my pricing break down for everything with two HD DVRs:
> 
> You know DirecTVs pricing structure, you can verify my TW pricing by calling the number on the line up. My HD DVRs have never locked up or randomly rebooted or even missed a recoding. What's it's now been twice that all DirecTV DVRs froze up nationwide. No outages when it rains, don't have to go out and sweep the dish off in the winter, no outages period except 2 on my end, and a 10 minute outage once at 1AM for system maintenance. All the channels I want, at a competitive price with 99.9% reliability and uptime, and excellent customer service the few times I've need it. And excellent picture quality. Never compared D* HD to TW HD side by side, but I did do A/B comparisons of SD. Here Time Warners SD picture quality wins hands down especially on the premium channels. Much less pixelation on TW. I can't complain.
> 
> Sure I have less HD channels, but they will be added and pretty much all the ones I care about I already have and thing else is just a bonus.


Again, we're all very happy that you're elated with your cable service. You friends over at CableTalk.com would be happy to hear about it I'm sure.

Anyhoo, we're deviating from the original topic here, which we've all (including you) agreed was misleading.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

See, I told you this discustion wasn't over...but perhaps it should be. :shrug:


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

No thanks I'd rather stay here at DBSTalk, thank you very much. Show me an advertisement that isn't misleading in any way.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Nick said:


> See, I told you this discustion wasn't over...but perhaps it should be. :shrug:


Nah, this is too much fun, watching all the DirecTV zealots squirm and mudsling to defend the reason for their existance.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Nah, this is too much fun, watching all the DirecTV zealots squirm and mudsling to defend the reason for their existance.


Good grief....the only one namecalling and defensive of an non-defensable practice has been you, my friend.    


tcusta00 said:


> Again, we're all very happy that you're elated with your cable service. You friends over at CableTalk.com would be happy to hear about it I'm sure.
> 
> Anyhoo, we're deviating from the original topic here, which we've all (including you) agreed was misleading.


:lol:

Amen. :biggthump


----------



## Renard (Jun 21, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> Nah, this is too much fun, watching all the DirecTV zealots squirm and mudsling to defend the reason for their existance.


BTW I wonder when Time Warner will start traffic shaping, or net neutrality, yeah, right cable is SO great


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

So where's the joke?


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Renard said:


> BTW I wonder when Time Warner will start traffic shaping, yeah, right cable is SO great


You mean like AT&T and Frontier? Yeah telcos are SO Great  I'll just get RR Biz Class if caps are impleminted, which they are only testing in one market.



> Good grief....the only one namecalling and defensive of an non-defensable practice has been you, my friend.


Keep telling yourself that as you sit on your roof and hug your satellite dish. And I AM NOT your friend, I CAN'T stand you people!


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> So where's the joke?


Steve: :raspberry  :grrr: :soapbox: :rant: :bang


----------



## Renard (Jun 21, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> You mean like AT&T and Frontier? Yeah telcos are SO Great  I'll just get RR Biz Class if caps are impleminted, which they are only testing in one market.


I was just wondering if trafic shaping or net neutrality was included in the price you pay. 
BTW most cable companies pick up the signals to their facilities from SATELLITES, yes SATELLITES then after Comcrap or TW compress it more because of the lack of bandwidth on their network.
So you maybe don't know it, but the channels you have at home come from satellites, Comcrap or TW just pick them up and distribut them to you from the cable.
Eliminate the cable and you recieve the channels directly from the sats with a Dish, hence the name Directv. Direct tv stations to your reciever, you have eliminated an useless point that just overcompress your channels, and this point is CABLE COMPANIES


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> And I AM NOT your friend, I CAN'T stand you people!


Yet here you still are.  :nono2:

Life's too short dude... go hang with people you can stand.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> Yet here you still are.  :nono2:
> 
> Life's too short dude... go hang with people you can stand.


he cannot stand us, yet this is DBSTalk, not CableTalk, and he Cannot get the NFL ST on his Cable.


----------



## Renard (Jun 21, 2007)

I was just wondering if trafic shaping or net neutrality was included in the price he pays. 
BTW most cable companies pick up the signals for their facilities from SATELLITES, yes SATELLITES then after Comcrap or TW compress it more because of the lack of bandwidth on their network.
So maybe he doesn't know it, but the channels he has at home come from satellites, Comcrap or TW just pick them up and distribut them to him from the cable.
Eliminate the cable companies and you recieve the channels directly from the sats with a Dish, hence the name Directv. Direct tv stations to your reciever, you have eliminated an useless point that just overcompress your channels, and this point is CABLE COMPANIES


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Keep telling yourself that as you sit on your roof and hug your satellite dish. And I AM NOT your friend, I CAN'T stand you people!


Just as an FYI - my Sat Dish is NOT on my roof.

Also as an FYI - almost everyone is my friend in my eyes, despite their choice of negative dialog and suspect perspectives. I know many people from Buffalo, and they are all nice.

While we may disagree, I choose to respectfully disagree.

So.....:backtotop

Most informed consumers understand the "slight of hand" marketing that Comcast is pulling on the 100 HD programs promotion. It's the un-informed consumers that we'd like to educate on the reality of this charade. Some of us dislike seeing fellow HD viewers get ripped off or mislead. Therefore, we attempt to educate them on the facts. Thank you.


----------



## Jack White (Sep 17, 2002)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...another chapter in the continuing saga of Comcrap deceptive advertising.


It's still not as deceptive as Dish Claiming to have Bluray Quality Picture and Sound on Turbo HD. Bluray has 40Mbps Headroom For Demanding Video Content, 7.1 channel DTS HD and Dolby Tru HD sound as well as LOSSLESS AUDIO Capabilities.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Jack White said:


> It's still not as deceptive as Dish Claiming to have Bluray Quality Picture and Sound on Turbo HD. Bluray has 40Mbps Headroom For Demanding Video Content, 7.1 channel DTS HD and Dolby Tru HD sound as well as LOSSLESS AUDIO Capabilities.


You have a valid point...

In addition.....even Swanni has now gotten on the Comcrap deception bandwagon:

http://www.tvpredictions.com/comcast111308.htm


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

What?! You mean Comcast dares to promote the benefits of THEIR service by talking about how much HD VOD they have? The monsters! And DirecTV promotes itself by including PPV in their channel line-ups? Have they no shame!? Next you'll be telling me that Dish actually promotes how good their hardware is.

Come on... if you like your service provider, who gives a rip what the other guys are selling? But they're being dishonest! Welcome to advertizing. But some people are going to get taken in by it! Yeah, again, welcome to the world of advertizing. Besides, what one person looks for is different from what the next person is looking for. If I like renting alot of HD movies, and I don't care about things like NFL ST, then guess what? Comcast would be the better choice for me. That's what everyone seems to be missing - yes, all services have their pros and they all have their cons. Which is the 'best service'? It depends on what you're looking for.

It's like saying 'what's the best car?' While there are some measures that you can compare against, the 'best car' for me depends on what I'm looking for. If I'm looking for flat-out acceleration, then a Corvette may be my 'best car'. If I'm looking to haul my family of 6, then a mini-van may be my 'best car'.

Do I think some of the ads get silly? Yeah, I do. Comcast has been running ads in this area where they're doing 'interventions'. Going to DirecTV customers homes (these aren't made up - they literally go into a DirecTV customer's home), and show them the difference in HD offerings between DirecTV and Comcast.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> What?! You mean Comcast dares to promote the benefits of THEIR service by talking about how much HD VOD they have? The monsters! And DirecTV promotes itself by including PPV in their channel line-ups? Have they no shame!? Next you'll be telling me that Dish actually promotes how good their hardware is.


Me thinks you missed the point - its plain wrong to compare apples and refrigerators (even though Comcast is knowingly trying to do just that). :eek2:


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Me thinks you missed the point - its plain wrong to compare apples and refrigerators (even though Comcast is knowingly trying to do just that). :eek2:


No, I got the point, but I don't think it's a real great one, to be honest. Again, if I'm big on renting HD movies, then wouldn't Comcast really have more HD content than DirecTV? From my perspective, yeah, it would. I guess I have trouble understanding why it's bad for Comcast to advertize how much HD VOD content they have - that's their big selling point. They've spent alot on developing and growing HD VOD. Besides, as someone else pointed out, if I can get 100 HD VOD movie titles through my cable service, how is that any different than DirecTV counting their HD PPV feeds as channels? Aren't they effectively the same thing? Yes, they are.

While I think what Comcast is doing is a tad dishonest, I also think counting full PPV channels in your HD channel line-up is a tad dishonest too. I just think that people tend to take these things personally - that was the point of my post. Why do I care how, e.g., Dish advertizes their stuff? Do I have Dish? Nope. Am I considering Dish? Nope. Am I happy with my provider? Yeah - very. So... do I care that Comcast is running those commercials? No. In fact, I take it as a positive sign. When you go after your competition like that, it's because your competition is taking a bite out of your numbers. The reason Comcast is doing this is because other providers (DirecTV and FiOS, e.g.) are taking big bites out of them.

Like I said, welcome to the wonderful world of advertizing.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Renard said:


> I was just wondering if trafic shaping or net neutrality was included in the price you pay.
> BTW most cable companies pick up the signals to their facilities from SATELLITES, yes SATELLITES then after Comcrap or TW compress it more because of the lack of bandwidth on their network.
> So you maybe don't know it, but the channels you have at home come from satellites, Comcrap or TW just pick them up and distribut them to you from the cable.
> *Eliminate the cable and you recieve the channels directly from the sats with a Dish, hence the name Directv*. Direct tv stations to your reciever, you have eliminated an useless point that just overcompress your channels, and this point is CABLE COMPANIES


That right there goes to show you how much you know about the subject. Dish Network, DirecTV and cable receive channels from the programming providers using huge Cband dishes at either the cable headend or a DBS providers uplink facility or a direct fiber link in some cases. DirecTV is a middleman just like Comcast. You receive nothing direct. Whether I watch Fox News on DirecTV or Time Warner it all originates from the same place, so don't try to pull that crap on me.

And comparing broadcast satellite technology using C band to DBS mini dishes is laughable. It's like me saying Guess how your satellite dish is connected to your IRD, that's right with a CABLE. So you maybe don't know it, but the channels you have at home come through a dish (well LNB actually) and are distributed to your outlets with a CABLE.



curt8403 said:


> he cannot stand us, yet this is DBSTalk, not CableTalk, and he Cannot get the NFL ST on his Cable.


Nor would I want it. I see my Bills on TV every week. I'd rather pay $400 for a few Bills tickets then get raped by DirecTV.



hdtvfan0001 said:


> Most informed consumers understand the "slight of hand" marketing that Comcast is pulling on the 100 HD programs promotion. It's the un-informed consumers that we'd like to educate on the reality of this charade. Some of us dislike seeing fellow HD viewers get ripped off or mislead. Therefore, we attempt to educate them on the facts. Thank you.


Like when someone gets DirecTV and for the first time sits down to enjoy 130 HD channels only to find out a good portion of them are DNS locals they don't qualify for, blacked out RSNs and a bunch of PPV channels. Do you inform and educate the potential DirecTV customers about that as well?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> No, I got the point, but I don't think it's a real great one, to be honest.


Then you apparently accept the premise that intentionally misleading uneducated people with deceptive marketing spin is a perfectly acceptable practice.

OK I understand.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Then you apparently accept the premise that intentionally misleading uneducated people with deceptive marketing spin is a perfectly acceptable practice.
> 
> OK I understand.


Again, show me an advertisement that is 100% honest, not misleading, no lying by omission, no misrepresentation. Comcast is no better nor worse than DirecTV. You just hate cable so you've single the industry out and your looking at it with an extremely biased view. Where's your complaint about Arby's, since the roast beef sandwiches they show on TV are nowhere near as big as the squished thing you actually get. Every company has a deceptive marketing spin.


----------



## Alan Gordon (Jun 7, 2004)

jpl said:


> Like I said, welcome to the wonderful world of advertizing.


For the record, I disagree with DirecTV's counting of PPV and HD-DNS channels (even though I receive a couple of the HD-DNS channels). I also disagree with Dish Network's counting of part-time RSNs.

That being said, Comcast would be wise to brag about the amount of VOD choices they have in HD... all in real time (compared to DirecTV or Dish) as that's actually impressive (and superior)... because while I don't agree with DirecTV and Dish Network counting some of the channels they do, at least it's still channels.

~Alan


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Like when someone gets DirecTV and for the first time sits down to enjoy 130 HD channels only to find out a good portion of them are DNS locals they don't qualify for, blacked out RSNs and a bunch of PPV channels.


Uh....if you look at the *REAL* DirecTV HD Channel list, you can clearly see that your representation is totally and plain wrong. Most are National HD Channels. Blackouts are very rare (I've had 1 in the past year), and PPV HD channels makes up a limited fraction of the overall list.

But then.....that's just more of the same old Cable KoolAid Propaganda. 

*Read em and weep...*

A&E HD
ABC HD (East)
ABC HD (West)
ABC Family HD
Altitude HD*
Animal Planet HD
Big Ten Network HD
Biography Channel HD
Bravo HD
Cartoon Network
CBS HD (East)
CBS HD (West)
Cinemax HD East
Cinemax HD West 
CMT HD
CNBC HD+
CNN HD
CSN Bay Area HD*
CSN Chicago HD
CSN Mid-Atlantic HD
CSN New England HD
CSTV HD
Discovery Channel HD
Disney Channel HD
ESPN HD
ESPN2 HD 
ESPNews HD
Food Network HD
Fox Business Network HD
Fox HD (East)
Fox HD (West)
Fox News Channel HD 
FSN Arizona HD
FSN Cincinnati HD*
FSN Detroit HD 
FSN Florida HD*
FSN Midwest HD
FSN North HD
FSN Northwest HD
FSN Ohio*
FSN Pittsburgh HD
FSN Prime Ticket HD
FSN Rocky Mountain HD
FSN South HD
FSN Southwest HD
FSN West HD
Fuel TV HD
FX HD
HBO HD East
HBO HD West
HD Theater
HDNet
HDNet Movies
HGTV-HD
History Channel HD
MASN HD*
MGM HD
Palladia HD
MSG HD
MSG PLUS HD
MTV HD
National Geographic HD
NBA.TV HD
NBC HD (East)
NBC HD (West)
NESN HD
NFL Network HD
NHL Network HD
Nick HD
Planet Green HD
Sci-Fi Channel HD
Science Channel HD
Showtime HD
Showtime Extreme HD
Showtime Showcase HD
Showtime West HD
Showtime 2 HD
Smithsonian Channel HD
SNY HD
Speed Channel HD
Spike HD
SportSouth HD
SportsTime Ohio HD*
Starz Comedy HD
Starz Edge HD
Starz HD East
Starz HD West
Starz Kids & Family HD
Sun Sports HD
TBS in HD
Tennis Channel HD
The 101 Network HD
The Movie Channel HD
The Weather Channel HD
TLC HD
TNT HD
Toon Disney HD
Universal HD
USA Network HD
VERSUS HD/GOLF CHANNEL HD
VH1 HD
YES HD
_Pay Per View channels _(28+)
Plus, an ever-growing library of On-Demand movies & shows


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Then you apparently accept the premise that intentionally misleading uneducated people with deceptive marketing spin is a perfectly acceptable practice.
> 
> OK I understand.


No, of course not. Don't tell me that you can't possibly tell the difference between 'spin' and outright deception. I guess maybe that's why the courts get involved in these things. Do I think they all play fast and loose with some of these terms? Yeah. DirecTV isn't innocent with this either. For example, part of their channel line-up includes distant nationals - both east and west coast versions - for a total of 8. How many DirecTV customers even qualify for those channels? I'll bet it's a real small number.

When someone claims they have the best service, aren't they spinning? Yeah, they are. When Comcast claims they have more fiber than Verizon, isn't that spinning? Yeah. Is it true? I'm sure it is.

I guess I'm not sure why everyone gets so bent out of shape over these ads. It's like you guys take it personally - like Comcast is targeting you.

Final, to answer the question of 'content' you have to ask what Comcast means by that. I mean, it's not exactly like they hide this stuff. If you have any doubts over what their HD channel line-up is, just go to their website. I mean at some point the consumer has to take SOME responsibility for their purchasing decisions. No, I don't believe you allow for outright deception, but when it comes to subjective measures (and yes, 'most HD content' is one of those measures) I think you set a real dangerous precendent if you clamp down on that kind of advertizing.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> No, of course not. Don't tell me that you can't possibly tell the difference between 'spin' and outright deception.


I guess some of us don't feel there *is *a difference.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> Don't tell me that you can't possibly tell the difference between 'spin' and outright deception.


I guess some of us don't feel there *is *a difference, other than the motivation.


> I guess I'm not sure why everyone gets so bent out of shape over these ads. It's like you guys take it personally - like Comcast is targeting you.


Actually, I laugh at Comcast almost everyday, even when they *DO* target my mailbox on almost a daily basis here.


----------



## Renard (Jun 21, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> That right there goes to show you how much you know about the subject. Dish Network, DirecTV and cable receive channels from the programming providers using huge Cband dishes at either the cable headend or a DBS providers uplink facility or a direct fiber link in some cases. DirecTV is a middleman just like Comcast. You receive nothing direct. Whether I watch Fox News on DirecTV or Time Warner it all originates from the same place, so don't try to pull that crap on me.
> 
> *And comparing broadcast satellite technology using C band to DBS mini dishes is laughable. It's like me saying Guess how your satellite dish is connected to your IRD, that's right with a CABLE. So you maybe don't know it, but the channels you have at home come through a dish (well LNB actually) and are distributed to your outlets with a CABLE.*
> 
> ...


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I guess some of us don't feel there *is *a difference, other than the motivation.
> 
> Actually, I laugh at Comcast almost everyday, even when they *DO* target my mailbox on almost a daily basis here.


Did you even read the article? There's nothing deceptive in there at all. They talk about their HD 'choices' - as in 'titles'. Hell, they even go further - they talk about HD VOD choices. They even go to the length of breaking out some of the numbers. Look, I'm no fan of Comcast either, but come on - there's nothing deceptive about the article. I guess I'm having a hard time understanding the outrage.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> Did you even read the article? There's nothing deceptive in there at all. They talk about their HD 'choices' - as in 'titles'. Hell, they even go further - they talk about HD VOD choices. They even go to the length of breaking out some of the numbers. Look, I'm no fan of Comcast either, but come on - there's nothing deceptive about the article. I guess I'm having a hard time understanding the outrage.


I read *their* press release, saw the commericals several times now, AND saw the marketing piece here now 3 times in the mail. Article no.

Phoney as a 3 dollar bill.

As for outrage...Naaaaah.....its more like a huge laugh at Comcast.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Renard said:


> The only thing they forgot to tell you because of the lack of bandwidth on their network, they have to compress the channels more from their facilities in order to squeze them on their network.


Ugh... not this one again. Ok, let's take this from the top. Not all cable operators compress their signals. Verizon doesn't. They get their video feeds and pass them as they are - the ONLY exception to this is when they have to pass along a channel broadcast in mpeg-4 (since fios is all mpeg-2 they have to repackage the channel feed). This notion that cable is more limited than DBS in terms of bandwidth is just a fallacy. Verizon uses QAM just like standard cable. They just went through an expansion, to use the full 870 MHz spectrum on their TV feed. What does that give them?

Well, it gives them 135 QAM channels to play with (FiOS is also all digital). How many channels can they carry, without additional compression, in that type of set-up? Alot. How many? Well, each QAM can carry data at a rate of ~40Mbps - fast enough to carry 2 HD channels without additional compression, or 8 - 9 SD digital channels. Verizon committed to carrying 150 HD channels with this configuration. Let's say they do that - let's say they reserve the space to carry 150 HD channels. Do the math - that takes up 75 QAMs. Ok, that leaves 60 for SD... and how many SD digital channels can you carry on 60 QAMs? Again, do the math - at 8 - 9 channels per QAM, that comes out to somewhere between 480 and 540 SD digital channels on top of those 150 HD. All without additional compression. Name for me a DBS service that can hit that.

And that's not all - QAM can go further. Many cable systems are working on rolling out DOCSIS 3.0, which allows for a substantially higher data transfer rate. Some are opting to go with 1GHz service. And some are starting to move to mpeg-4, giving them even more room.

This notion that all cable is over-compressed because they're out of room is utter nonsense. Verizon, just today, rolled out 17 new HD, and 8 new SD, channels in my area, bringing my HD total to 104 - and that doesn't include PPV, VOD, or even the premium sports stuff. And there are at least another 8 - 9 coming within the next couple weeks.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> Ok can you tell me because YOU know the subject and we don't here.


No, others know the subject, you just don't. And you continue to prove that.


> Tell me how the channels are coming to your tv. If you think that the channels you receieve at your place are direct from the tv stations, you are a fool to think that.


Where did I say that? You're the one that said that and I quote "Eliminate the cable and you recieve the channels directly from the sats with a Dish, hence the name Directv" and I said "DirecTV is a middleman just like Comcast. You receive nothing direct. Whether I watch Fox News on DirecTV or Time Warner it all originates from the same place" same place being Fox News' uplink. You're the one under the impression your getting a direct feed, not me.


> I think you missed the point in my talk. Do you really believe that TW or Comcrap in EACH facilities in this country recieve the channels thru fibers then distribute them to all cable costumers thru the common cable.


Um every time I'm on the I490 I pass by the back of Time Warner of Rochester's local headend. It's a dish and antenna farm with tons of c band dishes. Some channels are fiber fed, I know WXXI PBS in Rochester had a direct fiber link to TW. And a lot of cable companies are HFC, a good portion of Time Warner's cable network is fiber.



> My point is that most of the cable companies recieve their signals with sometimes Cband dish, Ku dish then redistribute the same channels to your cable.


And I said that, and DirecTV and Dish do the samething, only instead of passing it through a fiber or coax cable it's beamed back up to a satellite. DirecTV is a middleman just like Comcast. You receive nothing direct. Whether I watch Fox News on DirecTV or Time Warner it all originates from the same place,



> only thing they forgot to tell you because of the lack of bandwidth on their network, they have to compress the channels more from their facilities in order to squeze them on their network. I don't even mention the length of the cables, shunts, NOISE AMPLIFICATION that you have on your line to get the channels. I'll be curious to know the length you have from your cable company to your cable outlet. At the minimum a mile, a mile is a lot and within a mile you have a lot of noise.


With SDV there really is no lack of bandwidth at the moment hense why many TW divisions are adding HD channels left and right now that a good portion of them have upgraded. And there is no bitrate starvation. An SDV channel looks just as good as a QAM channel on my system. And as for noise, digital is not subjected to noise like analog. We have digital simulcast, my line up has been 100% digital for over two years now with an exception of one of the community access channels. I could live next door from the cable headend and get the same picture quality.



> Gosh I remember when i had analog cable, it was unwatchable, NOISY, GRAINY, GHOSTING in the picture.


Last time I had analog cable was 1998. made the switch to Dish, then DirecTV, then back to TW when they started digital simulcasting



> So you think by having a big Cdish you will get a better result on the picture viewpoint.


I've never seen analog cband, but from what I understand, and what people have said, it beats the hell out of digital satellite. No compression.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

So, whats your point? Yes I know the DirecTV HD line up, nothing to weep about as I have a good portion of them, a good portion are RSNs that would be blacked out for anything important, I, like millions of others don't qualify for DNS. And a handful of other are in my future. So you're telling me on all the RSNs you don't get blacked out for pro sports. Nice try. Drink some more DirecTV KoolAid why donchya!



hdtvfan0001 said:


> Uh....if you look at the *REAL* DirecTV HD Channel list, you can clearly see that your representation is totally and plain wrong. Most are National HD Channels. Blackouts are very rare (I've had 1 in the past year), and PPV HD channels makes up a limited fraction of the overall list.
> 
> But then.....that's just more of the same old Cable KoolAid Propaganda.
> 
> ...


 - 58 New HD titles On Demand, plus older movies

Not to mention, ESPN U HD, Travel Channel HD, Hallmark Movie Channel HD, LMN HD, Outdoor Channel HD and Crime & Investigation HD gets add tomorrow.

So what am I supposed to weep about again?


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Steve Mehs said:


> With SDV there really is no lack of bandwidth at the moment hense why many TW divisions are adding HD channels left and right now that a good portion of them have upgraded. And there is no bitrate starvation. An SDV channel looks just as good as a QAM channel on my system. And as for noise, digital is not subjected to noise like analog. We have digital simulcast, my line up has been 100% digital for over two years now with an exception of one of the community access channels. I could live next door from the cable headend and get the same picture quality.


Just out of curiosity, if for no other reason, is TWC running SDV for you guys? Like I said, just curious - I have a feeling that's where the industry as a whole is headed, and was curious as to how your system implemented it (e.g. I take it that TW wasn't stupid enough to require a separate coax for each channel feed - that they carry all the channels that you're selecting over the same coax). Is it mixed with QAM at all? I just find this stuff interesting (yeah, I'm a geek with this stuff).


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> So, whats your point?
> 
> So what am I supposed to weep about again?


The point? - Congrats on a 50% HD Channel solution (at a higher cost). 

Enjoy!


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The point? - Congrats on a 50% HD Channel solution (at a higher cost).
> 
> Enjoy!


Lets ease up on Steve, he has the channels that he wants, likes the price he has. maybe some day, when D10, D11 and D12 are all in use, and filled to capacity, he will be screaming, but until then, he has his dream. 
Word of Advice Steve, If your cable company calls you, tells you they are going to be blowing all of the used electrons from their cable lines, and asks you to put a paper bag over your cable boxes for 24 hours, I would do it if it was me.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

curt8403 said:


> Lets ease up on Steve, he has the channels that he wants, likes the price he has. maybe some day, when D10, D11 and D12 are all in use, and filled to capacity, he will be screaming, but until then, he has his dream.
> Word of Advice Steve, If your cable company calls you, tells you they are going to be blowing all of the used electrons from their cable lines, and asks you to put a paper bag over your cable boxes for 24 hours, I would do it if it was me.


Exactly, it's only TV, and since we're happy with what we have and he's happy with what he has, life will go on, as I stated a few days ago...



tcusta00 said:


> Again, we're all very happy that you're elated with your cable service. You friends over at CableTalk.com would be happy to hear about it I'm sure.
> 
> Anyhoo, we're deviating from the original topic here, which we've all (including you) agreed was misleading.


Plus he doesn't like us so it's moot anyway, right? :shrug:



Steve Mehs said:


> And I AM NOT your friend, I CAN'T stand you people!


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> So, whats your point? Yes I know the DirecTV HD line up, nothing to weep about as I have a good portion of them, a good portion are RSNs that would be blacked out for anything important, I, like millions of others don't qualify for DNS. And a handful of other are in my future. So you're telling me on all the RSNs you don't get blacked out for pro sports. Nice try. Drink some more DirecTV KoolAid why donchya!
> 
> - 58 New HD titles On Demand, plus older movies
> 
> ...


I'm not sure I understand you here.

Not counting PPV there are 102 channels listed.

It looks like there are 64 DirecTV has out of which you have 42 with 15 coming soon and 7 that you don't have. This leaves 37 that you say don't count/don't want.

I'll accept the 33 don't counts and the 1 never.

You list six channels in red. Does that mean you currently get those?

Additionally you listed 4 that you don't want.

It's pretty hard to follow your point.

I guess what I'm asking is what did you intend show in this comparison?

Mike


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

he is saying that he gets the On Demand that he wants from Comcast, that it has nearly as many channels as Directv has, That he does not want the extra ones that Directv offers, He is also a Comcast Fanboy, and nothing we can say will change his mind. He has plenty of useful things to say on non Directv Vs Comcast subjects, but nothing useful to say to us concerning directv...


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

curt8403 said:


> he is saying that he gets the On Demand that he wants from Comcast, that it has nearly as many channels as Directv has, That he does not want the extra ones that Directv offers, He is also a Comcast Fanboy, and nothing we can say will change his mind. He has plenty of useful things to say on non Directv Vs Comcast subjects, but nothing useful to say to us concerning directv...


Except that he's not a Comcast customer... Read his postings - he's a Time Warner customer.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> Except that he's not a Comcast customer... Read his postings - he's a Time Warner customer.


A Cable Gnome by any other name....  :lol:


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

jpl said:


> Just out of curiosity, if for no other reason, is TWC running SDV for you guys? Like I said, just curious - I have a feeling that's where the industry as a whole is headed, and was curious as to how your system implemented it (e.g. I take it that TW wasn't stupid enough to require a separate coax for each channel feed - that they carry all the channels that you're selecting over the same coax). Is it mixed with QAM at all? I just find this stuff interesting (yeah, I'm a geek with this stuff).


Switched Digital Video has been in my area for a while now. Rochester is one of TWs test markets, we were the first to test and one of the, if not the first to go live with it. The end user has no idea whether they're tuning into an SDV channel or QAM. You don't have to do nothing, everything delivered over the same coax and same box. All new HD channels and HD channels added last year, all new SD channels and SD channels added last year, digital simulcast, the Sports Packages, and the foreign channels are in SDV, so between everything, SD and HD, I'm guessing we have about 150 SDV channels on the system. Half of them being SD digital simulcast. Like I said everything is invisible to the customer, it's been working out great so far. I'm interested to know, what the limits to this are. I know 2 HD channels or 6-8 digital SD channels can fit comfortable on one QAM frequency, but no idea if and what any of the SDV limitations are. All I know is bandwidth does not seem to be a problem right now.


----------



## deltafowler (Aug 28, 2007)

Where would one go to see Comcast's current packages with channel offerings?


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

I did make a mistake on Comcast Vs Time Warner, which I have corrected, but Cable is still cable


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Switched Digital Video has been in my area for a while now. Rochester is one of TWs test markets, we were the first to test and one of the, if not the first to go live with it. The end user has no idea whether they're tuning into an SDV channel or QAM.


I've been following that technology now for almost the past year - it indeed sounds interesting and apparently promising (so far).

As you accurately pointed out...to the end user, it would be virtually undetectable, and would help the cable folks overcome limits in HD channel bandwidth capacities....which I suspect is why they are heavily investing in its beta-testing.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I've been following that technology now for almost the past year - it indeed sounds interesting and apparently promising (so far).
> 
> As you accurately pointed out...to the end user, it would be virtually undetectable, and would help the cable folks overcome limits in HD channel bandwidth capacities....which I suspect is why they are heavily investing in its beta-testing.


go here friends

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=142822&highlight=switched+digital


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

curt8403 said:


> go here friends
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=142822&highlight=switched+digital


So it looks like SDV = Titanic.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The point? - Congrats on a 50% HD Channel solution (at a higher cost).
> 
> Enjoy!


1) What higher cost? How many times do I have to say, DirecTV and an equivalent Time Warner package cost me about the same. DirecTV is a few cents more.

2) And what else don't you understand, the 50% of the channels I don't get are OOM RSNs, Distant Locals and PPV.



> That he does not want the extra ones that Directv offers,


Will you do me a favor, and I don't know READ what I post. Which HD channels don't I want? HBO HD West, Cinemax HD West, Starz HD West, Showtime HD West. See a pattern here? I have two HD DVRs, I live on the east coast, I don't need access to the same channels I already have just on a three hour delay. So don't pull the playing dumb crap and make it sound like I'm talking about every channel that DirecTV has that I don't, okay?



MicroBeta said:


> I'm not sure I understand you here.
> 
> Not counting PPV there are 102 channels listed.
> 
> ...


Not sure what's so hard to follow.

All the channels in red I have, the five other channels I listed I have in red, because I know it's hard to believe but, TW actually has HD channels DirecTV doesn't. Again the four I could careless about are West Coast feeds of movie channels. I live in NY with DVRs, I'd rather have unique channels then time shifted. And what did I intend to show, I think that is fairly obvious. Despite DirecTVs marketing campaign, and how much DirecTV Fanboys like to believe it, there isn't a lot of substance to that 130 HD channel claim.

Right now I have 54 HD channels, real channels, no PPV, no On demand, no sports packages. 6 of them are locals (soon to be 7, CW HD should be added, already, not sure what the hold up is), 3 of them my local RSNs, out of the 45 remaining, there are 39 that DirecTV has and 6 they don't. I'm going off a spread sheet I have and I am counting Mojo HD, my above post didn't take into account Mojo has the channel is going off the air in December. That should leave me with 28 HD channels (non, PPV, non OOM RSN, you know the bit) that DirecTV has that I do not currently receive, out of which about 20 TW has or will have agreements to carry. Not to mention TW has agreements now with Rainbow, DirecTV does not, and then there's the new Comcast HD channels being launched in a few weeks, which TW has agreement for, and the HBO/MAX HD channels.

By February at the latest, every TW franchise that has SDV in place, could have 110-115 HD channels no problem. And that includes all real bona fide channels, inlcuding a good 30 or so DirecTV doesn't have. But that will not happen. There are many TW franchises ran my idiots who are just plain stupid. Knowing TWs history, NYC, Albany, Rochester, and San Antonio will the bulk of the HD channels first. There are still TW franchises that don't carry A&E HD and Palladia HD. I've had them for going on two years now.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> So it looks like SDV = Titanic.


which I believe means that Comcast and TW will be soon facing


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

curt8403 said:


> go here friends
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=142822&highlight=switched+digital


Nice try. The biggest issue is with HD TiVos. There's a tuning adaptor coming out for them, that TW is providing for free.

http://www.timewarnercable.com/Rochester/products/cable/sdv/default.html

Sorry to burst your bubble, but SDV isn't going anywhere. I know you must hate the thought of another provider approaching DirecTVs HD channel count, but it's called competition. And what I want to know is why the FCC didn't make a big stink about MPEG 4 in the DBS world. Existing hardware, expensive existing hardware became obsolete with the advent of MPEG 4, but it was for the benefit of consumers. But cable does something similar and is bad. Go figure. But none the less, SDV is alive and well and will be for years to come.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Curt here's a question for you. Let's see if you actually answer a question. Why do you hate competition? I personally welcome any and every technological advancement, new HD channel and new SD channel, DirecTV and Dish Network offer. It helps the market stay competitive.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Sorry to burst your bubble, but SDV isn't going anywhere.


That's what curt seemed to be saying....perhaps it would have been more accurate to say it's going nowhere fast.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> 1)
> 
> Which HD channels don't I want? HBO HD West, Cinemax HD West, Starz HD West, Showtime HD West. See a pattern here? I have two HD DVRs, I live on the east coast, I don't need access to the same channels I already have just on a three hour delay. So don't pull the playing dumb crap and make it sound like I'm talking about every channel that DirecTV has that I don't, okay?


this is the exact list

Cinemax HD West - Don't Have It, Don't Want It
HBO HD West - Don't Have It, Don't Want It
Showtime West HD - Don't Have it, Don't Want It
Starz HD West - Don't have it, Don't want it

so, you are correct that 
you are missing only duplicate feeds plus the NFL network

You should know however that SDV is gonna die a horrid death now that the FCC has decided it is anti competitive.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> 1) Not sure what's so hard to follow.
> 
> All the channels in red I have, the five other channels I listed I have in red, because I know it's hard to believe but, TW actually has HD channels DirecTV doesn't. Again the four I could careless about are West Coast feeds of movie channels. I live in NY with DVRs, I'd rather have unique channels then time shifted. And what did I intend to show, I think that is fairly obvious. Despite DirecTVs marketing campaign, and how much DirecTV Fanboys like to believe it, there isn't a lot of substance to that 130 HD channel claim.
> 
> ...


I followed your posts math just fine. I was hoping you were going to draw some real conclusions from all of that. However, I can see you just want to slam anyone who stands up for DirecTV, with childish comments like "DirecTV Fanboys". I prefer DirecTV over any cable franchise in the state and Dish. If that makes me a Fanboy then so be it. By the same token it makes you a TW Fanboy....I'm just sayin'...

BTW, I have 73 HD channels, no PPV, no VOD, no sport packages. Five of them are locals(waiting on MyTV and PBS), five are my local RSNs.

Mike


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> I followed your posts math just fine. I was hoping you were going to draw some real conclusions from all of that. However, I can see you just want to slam anyone who stands up for DirecTV, with childish comments like "DirecTV Fanboys". I prefer DirecTV over any cable franchise in the state and Dish. If that makes me a Fanboy then so be it. By the same token it makes you a TW Fanboy....I'm just sayin'...
> 
> BTW, I have 73 HD channels, no PPV, no VOD, no sport packages. Five of them are locals(waiting on MyTV and PBS), five are my local RSNs.
> 
> Mike


So DirecTV has 19 more channels than Steve's provider. There we go. Take away the 4 that he wouldn't want (in case anyone happened to give a darn) and DirecTV has 15 more than Steve's provider.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> So DirecTV has 19 more channels than Steve's provider. There we go. Take away the 4 that he wouldn't want (in case anyone happened to give a darn) and DirecTV has 15 more than Steve's provider.


I actually like having the west coast movie channels. When we find something on that's already in progress or will conflict we know we can record it three hours later.

But hey, to each his own.

Mike


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> You should know however that SDV is gonna die a horrid death now that the FCC has decided it is anti competitive.


1) So you can predict the future?
2) Can you make a post without some picture inserted?

Sorry to say SDV is not going to die. Again, another person who can't answer questions I asked. I'll ask again, Why do you hate competition what is it about Comcast, Time Warner or any other MSO adding HD content that you seem to despise so much?



> I followed your posts math just fine. I was hoping you were going to draw some real conclusions from all of that. However, I can see you just want to slam anyone who stands up for DirecTV, with childish comments like "DirecTV Fanboys". I prefer DirecTV over any cable franchise in the state and Dish. If that makes me a Fanboy then so be it. By the same token it makes you a TW Fanboy....I'm just sayin'...


I call it as I see it. You all are DirecTV Fanboys. You're fans of DirecTV. What's the problem here? I am a fan of Time Warner, I am a Time Warner Fanboy. You all have absolutely have no problems slamming me because my opinions differ from yours, and I don't kneel down and bow before a satellite dish after I wake up every morning. And I will dish it right back, guaranteed! Unlike most of you guys I'm not married to my service provider. I over the past 10 years I've had Dish, DirecTV and TW. I keep up on the happenings and technology to always keep my options open. I made two half assed considerations to go back with DirecTV in the past year. Once when they got my Sabres broadcasts in HD, and last month during the TW/LIN dispute. But it's moot as I do have my Sabres in HD and my CBS affiliate is back. Dish Network will never be a consideration because of YES.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> 1) I call it as I see it. You all are DirecTV Fanboys. You're fans of DirecTV. What's the problem here? I am a fan of Time Warner, I am a Time Warner Fanboy.


Hmmmm....what was the name of this website again......hmmmmmm.......


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> 1) So you can predict the future?
> 2) Can you make a post without some picture inserted?
> 
> Sorry to say SDV is not going to die. Again, another person who can't answer questions I asked. I'll ask again, Why do you hate competition what is it about Comcast, Time Warner or any other MSO adding HD content that you seem to despise so much?
> ...


See, that's where you happen to be wrong: most of us here have no problem with healthy debate and we're here to make friends and have a good time. Where you always end up butting heads (and it's a pretty frequent occurrence around here no matter who you're conversing with) is that it's clear you think you're better than everyone else. You said in this very thread that you can't stand us. You always seem to get this irritated tone in your posts whenever anyone makes the slightest comment that may disagree with yours. And while some of your points may just be valid, the way you go about communicating them cultivates argument, not healthy debate. So I'll ask _you_ again, Steve, why are you here if you can't stand us? Instead of attacking Curt and others here (yeah, he's goofy and posts goofy pictures... so what? Do you have to attack him about it just because he doesn't want to engage in your pointless, argumentative conversation?) why don't you find a board where you _can_ stand the other members?


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Hmmmm....what was the name of this website again......hmmmmmm.......


And being DBS' main competitor, there's no room for a voice or two form the other side, the dark side, the cable side? I've never 'met (and I use that term loosely) so many people who are so in love with something like this. You can talk about your interests and not be overzealous towards those who don't support what you do, you know. I'm just here on the defensive, and only but in when I feel a valid point needs to be made, but with all those DirecTV blinders on, you guys are too blind to see. (Should I take a bet one which one of you will be the first to say that's an attacks on poor us) And while this site has a few Dish loyalists, it seems your DirecTV guys are much more defensive and into your choice of providers then they are.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> And being DBS' main competitor, there's no room for a voice or two form the other side, the dark side, the cable side? I've never 'met (and I use that term loosely) so many people who are so in love with something like this. You can talk about your interests and not be overzealous towards those who don't support what you do, you know. I'm just here on the defensive, and only but in when I feel a valid point needs to be made, but with all those DirecTV blinders on, you guys are too blind to see. (Should I take a bet one which one of you will be the first to say that's an attacks on poor us) And while this site has a few Dish loyalists, it seems your DirecTV guys are much more defensive and into your choice of providers then they are.


Our dishes have broad shoulders for cable folks to cry on.

Cable (and Fios and Uverse etc.) don't really have the "hobby appeal" that DBS has. It's different from "Home Theater" as a hobby. And many, many here are into the DBS electronics hobby at some level, including me. Some are a bit more sensitive to the dark side. Me, I get my web access from Comcast so I have to hope they do well enough to survive.:sure:


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

tcusta00 said:


> See, that's where you happen to be wrong:


I'm wrong aboout everything remember, I have cable, I'm not of your religion.


> most of us here have no problem with healthy debate and we're here to make friends and have a good time.


As long as you converse with those with the exact same points of view.



> Where you always end up butting heads (and it's a pretty frequent occurrence around here no matter who you're conversing with) is that it's clear you think you're better than everyone else.


I tell it like I see it.



> You said in this very thread that you can't stand us. You always seem to get this irritated tone in your posts whenever anyone makes the slightest comment that may disagree with yours.


Because most of you are too blind to see other opinions that differ from your own. My irritation comes from feeling like I'm talking to a brick wall as a result of all of you guys blindness.



> And while some of your points may just be valid, the way you go about communicating them cultivates argument, not healthy debate.


My points are never valid, I'm not a DirecTV subscriber remember, I'm not one of you.



> So I'll ask _you_ again, Steve, why are you here if you can't stand us? Instead of attacking Curt and others here (yeah, he's goofy and posts goofy pictures... so what? Do you have to attack him about it just because he doesn't want to engage in your pointless, argumentative conversation?)


Your use of the word attack is hilarious, I'm attacking some one because I ask 'Can you make a post without some picture inserted?'. That's an attack? Lets count how many times I've been attacked in this thread alone. Wait, I don't care. Life goes on. I say one thing about your beloved DirecTV or your fellow D* buddies and that's an attack, but ripping on me is all fine and dandy. Not that I really care, I find this more humorous then anything.



> why don't you find a board where you _can_ stand the other members?


No this site is fine. I've been a member here since Aug 12, 2001, and for a long period of time I was even a moderator and site administrator, imagine that one. By you guys, I didn't mean the entire membership, I just mean those of you in this thread, FYI.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> I'm wrong aboout everything remember, I have cable, I'm not of your religion.
> 
> As long as you converse with those with the exact same points of view.
> 
> ...


Yep, you just proved my point about 6 times in that post - you can just about cut the irony with a knife. :nono2:

And yes, it's a personal attack when you post something about someone else's posting style just to pick on him. Frankly that's just pointless and ridiculous.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Yeah, whatever you say there capt'n. Now do me a favor. Put me on your ignore list and leave me the hell alone. Sianara!


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> I'm wrong aboout everything remember, I have cable, I'm not of your religion.


I do not see you as being wrong, You are right about a lot of things, and the only difference I have with you is about TV, And that is just a difference of opinion.


> As long as you converse with those with the exact same points of view.


 Different points of view are good. I may not agree but different points are good.



> I tell it like I see it.


that is good. we need more people like you, especially in politics



> Because most of you are too blind to see other opinions that differ from your own. My irritation comes from feeling like I'm talking to a brick wall as a result of all of you guys blindness.


I am blind, I admit it, I have to wear glasses to see, but you mean blind to other people's opinions, that I am not. I have been with 1. Time Warner. 2. Dish and finally 3. Directv I have seen all 3 sides. I even used to work for TCI cable,



> My points are never valid, I'm not a DirecTV subscriber remember, I'm not one of you.


You may not be one of us, but your points are sometimes valid. remember I agreed that the channels you do not want are duplicates and it is reasonable . I disagree with you on your most recent statement. You do indeed have valid points.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> I call it as I see it. You all are DirecTV Fanboys. You're fans of DirecTV. What's the problem here? I am a fan of Time Warner, I am a Time Warner Fanboy. You all have absolutely have no problems slamming me because my opinions differ from yours, and I don't kneel down and bow before a satellite dish after I wake up every morning. And I will dish it right back, guaranteed! *Unlike most of you guys I'm not married to my service provider*. I over the past 10 years I've had Dish, DirecTV and TW. I keep up on the happenings and technology to always keep my options open. I made two half assed considerations to go back with DirecTV in the past year. Once when they got my Sabres broadcasts in HD, and last month during the TW/LIN dispute. But it's moot as I do have my Sabres in HD and my CBS affiliate is back. Dish Network will never be a consideration because of YES.


How superior you must be to be able to make rational decisions when the rest of can't. 

You don't have the slightest clue how any of us made our decisions to use DirecTV as our service provider. Yet you have the gall to imply that most of us are blindly using DirecTV like so many clueless lemmings without regard to reality.

Over the last 30 years I've had cable/satellite in 7 different states. I'm pretty sure I've based my choices on facts not whims.

All I wanted in reply to my post was some kind of analysis or comparison. At least that's what it seemed you started out to do. I was just wondering why you think your lineup with less HD channels is better than mine that has more. In the end I guess you wanted to list what was different without going out on a limb to support anything. You do a lot of bashing and posting without offering any real opinions (except about how mindless we all are). You make it very hard to have a meaningful discussion with you.

:backtotop

This is a list of my channels. No PPV, no VOD, and only my local RSN's. I happen to think it's a reasonable accounting of that HD channels available to me with DirecTV. As I've stated before, I actually like having the west coast movie channels. When we find something on that's already in progress or will conflict we know we can record it three hours later. However, if you remove those four channels that still leaves me with 69 strong.

Now by Comcast's standards this list is puny. IMHO, my list is reasonable and Comcast's isn't. I'm not going to go into what I consider to be channels I would/wouldn't watch. I don't believe that's a valid argument to determine HD content across service providers. It's subjective and different for everyone. To compare apples to apples you have to compare the channels directly.

So, from where I'm sitting Comcast, or any other service provider for that matter, can't come close enough to make me switch.

202 CNN HD
206 ESPN HD
207 ESPN News HD
209 ESPN2 HD
212 NFL Network HD
215 NHL Network HD
217 Tennis Channel HD
220 Big Ten HD
229 HGTV HD
231 Food Network HD
242 USA Network HD
244 SciFi Channel HD
245 TNT HD
247 TBS HD
248 FX HD
255 MGM HD
259 Universal HD
265 A & E HD
267 Smithsonian HD
269 History Channel HD
273 Bravo HD
276 National Geographic HD
278 Discovery HD
280 Learning Channel HD (TLC HD)
281 HD Theater (was Discovery HD Theater)
282 Animal Planet HD
284 Science Channel HD
286 Planet Green HD
290 Disney HD
292 Toon Disney HD
296 Cartoon Network
311 ABC Family HD
299 Nickelodeon (NIK1HD)
306 HDNet
325 Spike HD
327 Country Music Television (CMTHD)
331 MTV HD
332 MHD
335 VH1 HD 
355 CNBC HD
359 Fox Business HD
362 Weather Channel HD
501 HBO HD East
504 HBO West
512 Cinemax East
514 Cinemax West
518 Starz Kids and Family
519 Starz Comedy HD
520 Starz HD East
521 Starz HD West
522 Starz Edge HD
537 Showtime HD
538 SHO Too HD
540 Showtime HD West
541 Showtime Showcase HD
542 Showtime Extreme HD
544 Movie Channel HD
552 HDNet Movies
601 NBA TV HD
604 Versus HD / Golf Channel HD
607 Speed
610 CSTV HD
612 Fuel TV
621 MSG HD
622 YES HD
623 New England Sports Network/NESN HD
624 FSN New York HD
625 SportsNet New York HD
3 WFSB-HD
8 WTNH-HD
20 WTXX-HD
30 WVIT-HD
61 WTIC-HD

If you think I'm wrong then tell me so but tell me why so we can discuss it.

Mike


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> Yeah, whatever you say there capt'n. Now do me a favor. Put me on your ignore list and leave me the hell alone. Sianara!


You can't respond rationally to me so you respond with this. Yep, exactly what most of us have come to expect from Steve Mehs. :nono2:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> And being DBS' main competitor, there's no room for a voice or two form the other side, the dark side, the cable side?


Absolutely....room for everyone.....welcome.

Of course if the thread is known as the "Neverending Story"....that may be another matter...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> So, from where I'm sitting Comcast, or any other service provider for that matter, can't come close enough to make me switch.


I think we've pretty much documented the point to where all but 1 poster acknowledges, confirms, and accepts those as facts.

At this point, it would appear we're kinda in :beatdeadhorse: mode.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> How superior you must be to be able to make rational decisions when the rest of can't.
> 
> You don't have the slightest clue how any of us made our decisions to use DirecTV as our service provider. Yet you have the gall to imply that most of us are blindly using DirecTV like so many clueless lemmings without regard to reality.
> 
> ...


Oh, I don't know... I think mine comes pretty darn close:

http://www22.verizon.com/NROneRetai...-4C83-8792-C18E5798D68B/0/SEPA_HDX_100808.pdf

All the HD channels start on page 2 - from ch. 510 on. Also, all those listed as 'coming soon' were added yesterday. Plus, as a bonus we got two more - HSN HD and Encore HD. And we also got another set showing up as 'coming soon' on our on-screen guide:

558 ES.tv
587 NHL Network
589 NBA TV HD
599 Cars.tv
633 Pets.tv
674 MyDestn.tv
676 Recipe.tv
682 Crime & Investigation HD
695 Comedy.TV

Some markets have already seen those channels get turned on. So, let's see, my cable system currently gets me 104 HD channels in my market - and that count doesn't include PPV or premium sports pack HD feeds. Very soon to be 113. And guess what? FiOS doesn't run SDV - it's all QAM. And as I've said before - all without additional compression.


----------



## deltafowler (Aug 28, 2007)

deltafowler said:


> Where would one go to see Comcast's current packages with channel offerings?


Anyone?
This is a serious question.
I've looked over thier website, but I can't find any clear information on what channels they offer - HD and otherwise.

The two DBS providers list their's clearly enough, but with Comcast it seems to be some sort of a game?


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

deltafowler said:


> Anyone?
> This is a serious question.
> I've looked over thier website, but I can't find any clear information on what channels they offer - HD and otherwise.
> 
> The two DBS providers list their's clearly enough, but with Comcast it seems to be some sort of a game?


Go to Comcast's website, go under TV Programming, and then hit Channel Lineup.

Edit - you'll have to put in your address and zip to get your local listings.

I know they've hidden them and all...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> Go to Comcast's website, go under TV Programming, and then hit Channel Lineup.


...and keep your eyes on the middle walnut shell (with the little ball under it) as they shuffle them....


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and keep your eyes on the middle walnut shell (with the little ball under it) as they shuffle them....


Huh? You lost me on that one. What exactly are they shuffling? Again, I don't have any love for Comcast, but come on, finding their channel lineup isn't any harder than it is on DirecTV's website, and is actually easier to find than on Verizon's.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jpl said:


> Huh? You lost me on that one. What exactly are they shuffling? Again, I don't have any love for Comcast, but come on, finding their channel lineup isn't any harder than it is on DirecTV's website, and is actually easier to find than on Verizon's.


Since I had to explain the joke, my delivery obviously sucked.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> Yet you have the gall to imply that most of us are blindly using DirecTV like so many clueless lemmings without regard to reality.


Reading these posts, that is a fair conclusion to make. You forget one thing, I'm looking at all of his from an outside perspective.



> All I wanted in reply to my post was some kind of analysis or comparison.


Not sure what kind of analysis or comparison you're looking for that I didn't already provide.



> I was just wondering why you think your lineup with less HD channels is better than mine that has more.


I never said it was better, all I said was DirecTVs HD line up is not what it seems to be, after you get over the 130 channels of HD line and break down what those 130 channels actually are and wind up with it's a tad bit different.



> In the end I guess you wanted to list what was different without going out on a limb to support anything.


No actually what I wanted to show is what I stated above. Between what I have, what's on my horizon, what doesn't apply based on geographical location and what channels are not in my future. Take the channels I have currently, combine them with what TW will be adding, subtract ~25 out of market regional sports networks, and my line up and yours really aren't that much different. That's what I was getting at.



> You do a lot of bashing and posting without offering any real opinions (except about how mindless we all are). You make it very hard to have a meaningful discussion with you.


I give what I receive.

:backtotop



> This is a list of my channels. No PPV, no VOD, and only my local RSN's. I happen to think it's a reasonable accounting of that HD channels available to me with DirecTV. As I've stated before, I actually like having the west coast movie channels. When we find something on that's already in progress or will conflict we know we can record it three hours later. However, if you remove those four channels that still leaves me with 69 strong.


And that is a fine list, a few of which I would like, but I welcome just about any new HD channel addition. I never said west coast feeds don't count, they're national channels that everyone has access to. I just personally don't see the point. Even with DVR conflicts, the programming, both movies and original series repeats so much at some point within the next day or two there will be another showing of what you missed. I won't throw a fit if TW adds the HD west coast feeds, but considering , I hardly have any west coast feeds on my line up I doubt they will, The main HBO, Max, Showtime and Encore channels, that's it. Don't even have The Movie Channel West and Starz West was replaced with Starz Comedy back when I first went back to cable. HBO Comedy has been traditionally one of the most requested premium channels for DirecTV to add, if you took all the DirecTV subscribers who have HBO and polled them and asked them if they wanted HBO Family West or HBO Comedy, while I can't say for certain, I'm betting HBO Comedy would get the most votes. But DBS is a national service, I see no point at all having west coast feeds on a cable system in the east other than to boost channel count.

By welcome just about any HD channel that excludes west coast feeds. Tuesdays is the day TW makes channel changes, I check my line up to look for any changes. I'd be awfully disappointed to see HBO West HD was added, a 3 hour time delay of what I already have, instead of unique channels that I don't have access to.

If everything works out and we continue to see channels get added in Rochester relatively quickly this could very well be what DirecTV has that we don't. And heaven forbid, I have to be judgmental, but look at what's left, West Coast feeds, the Viacom music channels which have very little to no true HD content. That leaves NFL Network HD, Smithsonian HD and Fuel HD. Then you have to add in the 5 HD channel I have that DirecTV doesn't have, plus all the additional HBO/MAX HD channels, Lifetime HD, Fuse HD, the new Comcast HD channels and the rest I've named many times so far. There are great possibilities here. It's set in stone for NYC, but any TW cable customer in San Antonio, Albany or Rochester should be very excited we should get many early Christmas gifts from TW this year.

212 NFL Network HD
267 Smithsonian HD
327 Country Music Television (CMTHD)
331 MTV HD
335 VH1 HD 
504 HBO West
514 Cinemax West
521 Starz HD West
540 Showtime HD West
612 Fuel TV

And not to drift further off topic, well hell if that matters now, but what about this post. In reguards to using the word Fanboy, my comments are childish and I get ridiculed shortly after, this post has been up for 4 hours and counting, and not one reply of that nature, in fact not one reply period. And it's essentially carrying the same message. Could it because he has DirecTV and it's okay to post something like that, where as I had DirecTV so that makes me saying the same thing somehow worse.

All am saying is if I'm going to be nailed to the cross and crucified for speaking opinions about DirecTV and DirecTV followers, then I expect others to have the same thing done to them. Whether I subscribe to the service or not should be irrelevant.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

curt8403 said:


> I do not see you as being wrong, You are right about a lot of things, and the only difference I have with you is about TV, And that is just a difference of opinion.
> Different points of view are good. I may not agree but different points are good.
> 
> that is good. we need more people like you, especially in politics
> ...


Those are fair assessments to make. If more people thought about it like that this would be a much better place. It's funny in a thread about Travel Channel HD, I basically asked what is so compelling about the Travel Channel. I disagree with the turn the channel has taken, a bunch of DirecTV people want Travel HD, I've had it for over 6 months, and I asked for suggestions on what is so good about the channel so that maybe I could find some value in it. Hol-ley crap, did that go amuck. Again I got crucified, then finally someone gave me some suggestions on some good programming. If you're not an ass to me, I'll return the favor, it's a very simple concept. I'm not asking for anyone to agree with me, I'm not looking to get anyone to switch from one provider to another I'm just stating opinions that contradict the norm of a lot of people here and they don't like that.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> Reading these posts, that is a fair conclusion to make. You forget one thing, I'm looking at all of his from an outside perspective.


That's true and yet, not. Your outside perspective is not completely unique. Otherwise it implys none of us have had any other cable/sat experience. The tone of your responses implys that we have no idea what were talking about outside of DirecTV. I know you didn't come right out and say it but that's how you come off.



Steve Mehs said:


> Not sure what kind of analysis or comparison you're looking for that I didn't already provide.


See below.



Steve Mehs said:


> I never said it was better, all I said was DirecTVs HD line up is not what it seems to be, after you get over the 130 channels of HD line and break down what those 130 channels actually are and wind up with it's a tad bit different.


 See below.



Steve Mehs said:


> No actually what I wanted to show is what I stated above. Between what I have, what's on my horizon, what doesn't apply based on geographical location and what channels are not in my future. Take the channels I have currently, combine them with what TW will be adding, subtract ~25 out of market regional sports networks, and my line up and yours really aren't that much different. That's what I was getting at.


From the "See Below" above. Now that's an analysis that makes sense.

I thought that's were you were going but it wasn't clear.

You were doing something that I also have tendency to do. I sometimes put out info assuming that someone knows what I'm thinking without providing enough for them to make the links in the info. People can't read minds so we have to provide our point clearly especially in long posts.

Merely listing what you have/don't have/coming/etc. doesn't do very much. It's a big post in response to a big post and leaves the reader to draw his/her own conclusions and can come off a little disjointed.

BTW, I know you didn't say yours was better. I was just prodding you to reply. I should have worded that better. :grin:



Steve Mehs said:


> I give what I receive.


 I have a little problem with this one. This just my opinion but I see it as you giving, then getting, then you give what you receive. That is to say, IMO, you start it and get mad when someone else gets mad. Again people can't read minds and maybe rewording or a smiley or two might lighten the tone and come off less arrogant. You have a tendency to put others on the defensive making things offensive. Just my 2¢. 



Steve Mehs said:


> And not to drift further off topic, well hell if that matters now, but what about this post. In reguards to using the word Fanboy, my comments are childish and I get ridiculed shortly after, this post has been up for 4 hours and counting, and not one reply of that nature, in fact not one reply period. And it's essentially carrying the same message. Could it because he has DirecTV and it's okay to post something like that, where as I had DirecTV so that makes me saying the same thing somehow worse.
> 
> All am saying is if I'm going to be nailed to the cross and crucified for speaking opinions about DirecTV and DirecTV followers, then I expect others to have the same thing done to them. Whether I subscribe to the service or not should be irrelevant.


Because your use is more pejorative and with the overall tone of your posts it comes off in a derogatory fashion.

That post also didn't also include text saying that anyone else was clueless or mindlessly following the pack.

It all goes back to your "I give what I receive" comment. Question, when you go on the offense how are we to take your use of "FanBoy" as anything but derogatory?


Steve Mehs said:


> :backtotop
> 
> And that is a fine list, a few of which I would like, but I welcome just about any new HD channel addition. I never said west coast feeds don't count, they're national channels that everyone has access to. I just personally don't see the point. Even with DVR conflicts, the programming, both movies and original series repeats so much at some point within the next day or two there will be another showing of what you missed. I won't throw a fit if TW adds the HD west coast feeds, but considering , I hardly have any west coast feeds on my line up I doubt they will, The main HBO, Max, Showtime and Encore channels, that's it. Don't even have The Movie Channel West and Starz West was replaced with Starz Comedy back when I first went back to cable. HBO Comedy has been traditionally one of the most requested premium channels for DirecTV to add, if you took all the DirecTV subscribers who have HBO and polled them and asked them if they wanted HBO Family West or HBO Comedy, while I can't say for certain, I'm betting HBO Comedy would get the most votes. But DBS is a national service, I see no point at all having west coast feeds on a cable system in the east other than to boost channel count.
> 
> ...


I know what you mean about the west coast feeds. However, I find it more convenient to just scroll over a few hours and know exactly where the show I'm looking for is going to be. Otherwise I have to search. Yeah, I'm basically saying that I'm lazy. 

I stated earlier that I thought interjecting what channels I would/wouldn't watch is too subjective to be used to compare service provider lineups. That being said, IMHO, using channels that are coming soon to compare lineups is also invalid. It assumes that one lineup will remain static while the other will expand. Of course if something is scheduled to be added tomorrow-ish that may be ok. We all know how scheduling goes beyond that. :sure:

IMO, the only way to make comparisons it use current lineups....apples to apples. Using that as a calibration standard, jpl's FiOS lineup is intriguing. Moot because it's not available for me yet but that's a fine lineup. However, by the same standard I find TW's lineup lacking. Sorry. :guck:

Mike


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

jpl said:


> Oh, I don't know... I think mine comes pretty darn close:
> 
> http://www22.verizon.com/NROneRetai...-4C83-8792-C18E5798D68B/0/SEPA_HDX_100808.pdf
> 
> ...


That's a pretty good lineup. 

We don't have FiOS in my area yet. 

Mike


----------



## deltafowler (Aug 28, 2007)

jpl said:


> Go to Comcast's website, go under TV Programming, and then hit Channel Lineup.
> 
> Edit - you'll have to put in your address and zip to get your local listings.
> 
> I know they've hidden them and all...


Then apparently they have zero HD channels available in my market, because I did all of that and I still see no HD designations nor distinctions.
I see channels aplenty. Most of them worthless, just like DirecTV and Dish, but there's nothing there telling me what's in HD and what isn't.

And I got the joke, if that's what we're calling it.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

deltafowler said:


> Then apparently they have zero HD channels available in my market, because I did all of that and I still see no HD designations nor distinctions.
> I see channels aplenty. Most of them worthless, just like DirecTV and Dish, but there's nothing there telling me what's in HD and what isn't.
> 
> And I got the joke, if that's what we're calling it.


It looks like Comcast doesn't arrange channels with any consistency. I had to scroll way down to find any listed as HD. But, for my local service, I saw a bunch:

http://www.comcast.com/Customers/Clu/ChannelLineup.ashx

Here's my local list - I had to go down to channel 200 before I saw any HD listed.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> That's a pretty good lineup.
> 
> We don't have FiOS in my area yet.
> 
> Mike


BTW, just to make it clear, I wasn't trying to say my service is better than your's. I had DirecTV for years and I really liked their service and offerings alot. The main point of my post, as well as one other that I put in this thread, is that the notion that cable is 'tapped out' is absolute, utter nonsense. One sense I do get on this thread, and others, is the sense that people on here don't want DirecTV to lose the top HD spot. I've posted about this before, but I'll repeat it here - that's simply an attitude I don't understand. I mean I understand why someone would want their service to succeed. But I don't understand the attitude that other services shouldn't improve. I saw a similar attitude on a cable forum about a year and half ago when DirecTV was set to turn on all those HD channels. There was this attitude that DirecTV wasn't serious about that expansion, and that it almost sounded like it would be a bad thing if it happened. Like they wanted DirecTV to fail.

I took some of those folks to task for that. Even though I wasn't a DirecTV customer at the time, I was giddy that they succeeded at that, for one simple reason - I knew what that would mean for me. I knew that would mean, in time, more HD for EVERYONE. In fact, I don't think there are many systems out there that could have broken the trail like DirecTV did - you need a company with lots of customers to be able to have the kind of pull that you need to direct cable channel providers to start going HD (if Verizon had gone up to, say, CNN and said 'give us the channel in HD, and we'll provide it to all of our customers!' I don't think they would have gotten the same reaction that DirecTV did when they said the same thing to these providers). I was excited that some provider was making that push, because I knew it would mean more HD for me. And that's a great thing.

I can't imagine anyone thought that these other providers would just take this lying down, though. I get a similar sense from some on here that they want cable systems to fail at catching up with DirecTV. And, again, I just don't understand that - what possible benefit would there be to you if they did fail? 'But if they succeed then some customers would go back to cable!' Yeah, and it would force DirecTV to get even MORE competitive, making them a better service yet. What a concept! Competition will do that. DirecTV drew a line in the sand, and one provider after another is crossing that line. I said back then that DirecTV's top spot would be a temporary gig - I gave it 12 - 18 months before most of the other big boys would catch up. And now that's about where we are.

I have no love for Comcast, but you know what? I WANT them to succeed at this. They're direct competition for FiOS in this area, and I don't want Verizon to just sit still. I want them to improve. Without the heat of competition, there's no incentive to do that (if you want to see what I'm talking about, take a look at just how fast CableVision is trying to roll out DOCSIS 3.0 - why? Because Verizon now has a video franchise in NYC, and they need that to compete - after Verizon got that franchise, the pace for rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 became nothing short of frenetic).


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

deltafowler said:


> Then apparently they have zero HD channels available in my market, because I did all of that and I still see no HD designations nor distinctions.
> I see channels aplenty. Most of them worthless, just like DirecTV and Dish, but there's nothing there telling me what's in HD and what isn't.
> 
> And I got the joke, if that's what we're calling it.


I've always found it difficult to get anything other than basic lineups from the national web sites.

I have found some links to local franchises that sometimes had the lineups.

For the most part I went to friends who have those companies to find what it really is. In my experience it's usually different from what I found online. Sometimes a little sometimes a lot. 

Mike


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

jpl said:


> BTW, just to make it clear, I wasn't trying to say my service is better than your's. I had DirecTV for years and I really liked their service and offerings alot. The main point of my post, as well as one other that I put in this thread, is that the notion that cable is 'tapped out' is absolute, utter nonsense. One sense I do get on this thread, and others, is the sense that people on here don't want DirecTV to lose the top HD spot. I've posted about this before, but I'll repeat it here - that's simply an attitude I don't understand. I mean I understand why someone would want their service to succeed. But I don't understand the attitude that other services shouldn't improve. I saw a similar attitude on a cable forum about a year and half ago when DirecTV was set to turn on all those HD channels. There was this attitude that DirecTV wasn't serious about that expansion, and that it almost sounded like it would be a bad thing if it happened. Like they wanted DirecTV to fail.
> 
> I took some of those folks to task for that. Even though I wasn't a DirecTV customer at the time, I was giddy that they succeeded at that, for one simple reason - I knew what that would mean for me. I knew that would mean, in time, more HD for EVERYONE. In fact, I don't think there are many systems out there that could have broken the trail like DirecTV did - you need a company with lots of customers to be able to have the kind of pull that you need to direct cable channel providers to start going HD (if Verizon had gone up to, say, CNN and said 'give us the channel in HD, and we'll provide it to all of our customers!' I don't think they would have gotten the same reaction that DirecTV did when they said the same thing to these providers). I was excited that some provider was making that push, because I knew it would mean more HD for me. And that's a great thing.
> 
> ...


I didn't think you were saying anything was better. 

I work with a few guys from RI that have FiOS and it really seems it will be some big compition for both sat providers in the future.

Everyone wants to say theirs is the best service. Realistically it probably is for their situation.

If I had based my decision solely on amount of HD I would have went elsewhere. At the time DirecTV only had about 10 channels. For me at least there were other considerations. In my case the biggest reason was local channels. DirecTV had them and at the time Dish didn't. My cable company, which almost had it's franchise license pulled by the state over customer service and outtages, had to go.

We all have our reasons. 

As for it being a temporary gig...that's going to be true for all the providers. Those that can't keep up could be in trouble though.

Mike


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Can we all agree that what each of us really wants is to have our choice of a particular provider, whether sat or cable, to be validated? Arguing about whose provider is best is like arguing about whose car model is best -- not only pointless, but in the end, no one is swayed and no minds are changed.

This thread was started by a sat sub whose apparent intent was to disparage and ridicule Comcast's current advertising of 1,000 HD 'choices' in defense of his own provider's HD channel numbers. It is what it is, and if any of you resent the fact that I have, at any given time, more HD programming choices, then that is your problem, not mine.

I have both Comcast and Dish and I am satisfied with my choice of multi-channel video providers (MCVP) and I don't feel compelled to defend it, nor do I feel the need to defend Comcast's use of 'choices' rather than 'channels', which in the context of a VOD service, makes sense to me. My purpose in posting earlier in this thread was not to disparage, but simply to help those who are still wedded to channel counts understand that there are many new programming delivery options coming to the fore that are not necessarily 'channel' dependent.

I was born into a world without television, and to see how far we've come is absolutely amazing. To paraphrase Lawrence Welk, today's television is a _"wunnerful, wunnerful world"_ of programming delivery and viewing options, the likes of which earlier generations could only dream about. Instead of arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, let us revel in the wealth of choices we _do_ have rather than arguing about channel counts and seeking validation of our own personal MCVP choices.

To quote that other great philosopher, Bro. Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Nick said:


> Can we all agree that what each of us really wants is to have our choice of a particular provider, whether sat or cable, to be validated? Arguing about whose provider is best is like arguing about whose car model is best -- not only pointless, but in the end, no one is swayed and no minds are changed.


YES!! That's a very accurate statement and it's rather ridiculous to be having this argument over and over again in all of these threads.

With that having been said, there's always going to be a tone of "fanboyism" on a site dedicated to the promotion of a particular medium, if it's a Ford Mustang site or DBS site.

If a Camaro enthusiast went into a Mustang site and disparaged the Mustang while touting the Camaro he's obviously gonna get beat up.

If a couple of yuppies went into the raunchiest biker bar and loudly discussed how much Harley's suck they're gonna get their butts kicked.

If a cable subscriber comes to a DBS site and arrogantly touts the benefits of Time Warner cable and how much better it is than satellite he's gonna get beat up.

The debate is healthy if it's approached in a healthy manner. It becomes not so healthy and contributes to an argumentative tone when it's done in an argumentative manner. It's all in the delivery. :grin:


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> YES!! That's a very accurate statement and it's rather ridiculous to be having this argument over and over again in all of these threads.
> 
> With that having been said, there's always going to be a tone of "fanboyism" on a site dedicated to the promotion of a particular medium, if it's a Ford Mustang site or DBS site.
> 
> ...


In Utah there are 2 college football teams (The Utes and the Cougars) that are in a huge rivalry (the two colleges are 40 miles apart) and there is a lot of very bad things happen around the time that the two teams play each other every year. makes me ashamed of both colleges and makes me hate college football in general.

Let us not have that happen in a discussion between the services of cable vs Satellite.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

There's a banner on the top of this web page that says:

DBSTalk.Com > Non-DBS Topics > Tech Talk - Gadgets, Gizmos and Technology > Comcast ...

Special emphasis -- 'Non-DBS Topics' 

What's this 'Don't come into my church to criticize my religion' nonsense all about?

--- CHAS


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

HIPAR said:


> There's a banner on the top of this web page that says:
> 
> DBSTalk.Com > Non-DBS Topics > Tech Talk - Gadgets, Gizmos and Technology > Comcast ...
> 
> ...


You were fine with the information, right up through the "*DBSTalk.Com > Non-DBS Topics > Tech Talk - Gadgets, Gizmos and Technology* >" part....

The Comcast heading and topic was by *the original poster* - its not a topic area.

This IS a satellite topic site....ego the name...DBSTalk....


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

HIPAR said:


> There's a banner on the top of this web page that says:
> 
> DBSTalk.Com > Non-DBS Topics > Tech Talk - Gadgets, Gizmos and Technology > Comcast ...
> 
> ...


hdtvfan0001 said it best, this is indeed a satellite topic site full of satellite enthusiasts. You can't expect to come in here and tout the goodness of cable and not get jumped on. Who do you think frequents the non-DBS topics areas of the site?? !rolling


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tcusta00 said:


> hdtvfan0001 said it best, this is indeed a satellite topic site full of satellite enthusiasts. You can't expect to come in here and tout the goodness of cable and not get jumped on. Who do you think frequents the non-DBS topics areas of the site?? !rolling


It would never even enter my mind to *ever* go to a cable users site.

What would be the purpose of going there, let alone posting anything, other than to perhaps dive into and antagonize some of them....hmmmm....maybe I'm onto something....


----------



## xIsamuTM (Jul 8, 2008)

"don't feed the trolls"


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

xIsamuTM said:


> "don't feed the trolls"


They have quite an appetite, so feeding them is both easy and risky. :lol:

Wondering how much longer this thread will even live, as no other points on either side seem remotely possible....


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Original post in this thread:


garys said:


> *Comcast Announces More the 1,000 HD Choices*
> 
> Looks like Comcast has gone to counting programs/movies and not channels.
> 
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/200...l_almost. php


Let me remind you (again) that this thread was started by a sat sub in criticism of Comcast, not by a cable sub. Are we not free to post in defense of our choice of provider?


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Nick said:


> Let me remind you (again) that this thread was started by a sat sub in criticism of Comcast, not by a cable sub. Are we not free to post in defense of our choice of provider?


No, sir, and again, it's not the healthy debate that's being criticized here, it's the antagonistic attitude that's being taken against us by some cable subscribers.

The OP was not critical at all, either, it was just an observation.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tcusta00 said:


> No, sir, and again, it's not the healthy debate that's being criticized here, it's the antagonistic attitude that's being taken against us by some cable subscribers.
> 
> The OP was not critical at all, either, it was just an observation.


Well said.

Momma Gump always said if you play with fire, be ready to get burned. :lol:


----------



## xIsamuTM (Jul 8, 2008)

-.- yeah, but we can try not to fan the flames as much as possible


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

I don't like comcast .... and i've had dbs for a long time.

But, I do think the concept of "channels" is getting obsolete - because of DVRs. Except for live programs I don't see them survive in a couple of decades - at least the way they dominate "TV" entertainment now.

VOD will probably replace most of the channels that just bunch a lot of programs and stream them. Channels will go the way of AOL.

Interesting question is - what will happen to DBS then ....


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

garys said:



> Looks like Comcast has gone to counting programs/movies and not channels.
> 
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/20...t_hd_content_anytime_anywhere_well_almost.php





Nick said:


> Original post in this thread:
> 
> Let me remind you (again) that this thread was started by a sat sub in criticism of Comcast, not by a cable sub. Are we not free to post in defense of our choice of provider?


hmmm... Not sure where he criticized Comcast in the least. He merely stated that they were now counting by programs and not by channels. Me thinks the only reason you would view that as criticism is if you knew it wasn't the right thing to do.


----------

