Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Directv HD Chanels

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
June 5, 2004 8:56:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Does anyone know when or ? DTV will add more HD chanels to compete with Dish
& Voom??

More about : directv chanels

Anonymous
June 5, 2004 8:56:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV doesn't have
the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much bandwidth to carry an
HD video signal as it does a regular channel. The other situation is that
frankly there just isn't that much HD programming available yet. Example,
look at Voom, offering all those old, old movies and HD "demo" channels
just to have something to call "HD".

Voom may be your idea of HD but it certainly isn't mine.

HD just for the sake of it being in HD is not what the majority of viewers
want. Consumers want their favorite channels and their favorite programs
in HD. Right now that equates to only the evening/prime time major
networks, which are available free off the air with an OTA antenna, which
in most (but not all) cases, has to be installed outside to get decent
reception. Each of the major networks currently has only 2-3 hours of
nightly HD programming.

Compare current 'HD' programming to how it was with color programming in
the 1960s. Aside from evening prime time shows, everything was in black
and white. This situation didn't change overnight, either. It was a good
10 years before B&W broadcasts finally became the exception rather than
the rule.

Considering the investment that has to be made on the broadcaster's part,
I wouldn't look for 'HD' to become commonplace anytime soon.


--
Support XM Satellite Radio!
Tell the FCC how you feel about the Natl Assn of Broadcasters'
attempts to block local content (Traffic & Weather)! We need
your help, please.
<http://www.xmradio.com/grassroots/index.jsp&gt;
Anonymous
June 6, 2004 1:47:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
> My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV doesn't have
> the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much bandwidth to carry an
> HD video signal as it does a regular channel. The other situation is that
> frankly there just isn't that much HD programming available yet. Example,
> look at Voom, offering all those old, old movies and HD "demo" channels
> just to have something to call "HD".
>
>I'd like to see INHD on DTV.
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Related resources
Anonymous
June 6, 2004 1:47:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

<cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
news:20040605174718.089$7y@newsreader.com...
> MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
>> My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV doesn't have
>> the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much bandwidth to carry an
>> HD video signal as it does a regular channel. The other situation is that
>> frankly there just isn't that much HD programming available yet. Example,
>> look at Voom, offering all those old, old movies and HD "demo" channels
>> just to have something to call "HD".
>>
>>I'd like to see INHD on DTV.
> Chip
>

Isn't INHD partially owned by Comcast? I doubt they are gonna sell it to
Direct TV at any price.
Anonymous
June 6, 2004 4:19:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
> <cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:20040605174718.089$7y@newsreader.com...
> > MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
> >> My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV doesn't
> >> have the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much bandwidth to
> >> carry an HD video signal as it does a regular channel. The other
> >> situation is that frankly there just isn't that much HD programming
> >> available yet. Example, look at Voom, offering all those old, old
> >> movies and HD "demo" channels just to have something to call "HD".
> >>
> >>I'd like to see INHD on DTV.
> > Chip
> >
>
> Isn't INHD partially owned by Comcast? I doubt they are gonna sell it to
> Direct TV at any price.

Didn't know that. You're probably right.
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
June 6, 2004 12:54:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"John Anderson" <chops9x@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:<VfWdnRahLtTqrl_dRVn-gQ@adelphia.com>...
> Does anyone know when or ? DTV will add more HD chanels to compete with Dish
> & Voom??

DirecTV has no history of giving much advance notice of when new
channels will be added (HD or otherwise). I am switching to VOOM. At
49.50 (VOOM + 9.50 equip rental), it is comparable to DTV (33.95 +
10.99), and there is more HD, including Bravo & TNT (not available on
DTV). Since my wife has cable for her UPN & WB channels which are not
available on DTV or VOOM, my analysis indicates that I will only lose
3 channels that I actually watch.

Regarding the outdated movies comment, in reality, one of the DTV
channels is HDNet Movies, and that is replaced by 10 similar channels
on VOOM. With no hardware to buy & no commitment, there is really no
downside to switching. I am also under the impression that VOOM has
more bandwidth with which to expand.

I will keep DTV around for the NFL package & the sports channels in
the Fall (for college football shows & volleyball, my avocation).

Just my opinion & rationale. I will know more after the June 14
installation.

Dale
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 3:59:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

If Comcast tried withhold programming from DirecTV, expect the FCC to get
involved.
In the recent Fox buyout of DirecTV, the FCC made sure that Fox couldn't use
their position as a content provider to competitive advantage.


<cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
news:20040605201958.465$2p@newsreader.com...
> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
> > <cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
> > news:20040605174718.089$7y@newsreader.com...
> > > MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
> > >> My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV doesn't
> > >> have the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much bandwidth to
> > >> carry an HD video signal as it does a regular channel. The other
> > >> situation is that frankly there just isn't that much HD programming
> > >> available yet. Example, look at Voom, offering all those old, old
> > >> movies and HD "demo" channels just to have something to call "HD".
> > >>
> > >>I'd like to see INHD on DTV.
> > > Chip
> > >
> >
> > Isn't INHD partially owned by Comcast? I doubt they are gonna sell it to
> > Direct TV at any price.
>
> Didn't know that. You're probably right.
> Chip
>
> --
> -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
> Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 4:28:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Its pretty certain that D* will add more HD channels in the near future,
maybe next month. they just launched a new satellite given them more
bandwidth. They are concentrating now on adding new markets and
(apparently) moving some markets from the 101 satellite to the new 119
satellite.


"John Anderson" <chops9x@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:VfWdnRahLtTqrl_dRVn-gQ@adelphia.com...
> Does anyone know when or ? DTV will add more HD chanels to compete with
Dish
> & Voom??
>
>
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 5:35:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Vince Stone wrote:
> If Comcast tried withhold programming from DirecTV, expect the FCC to
> get involved.
> In the recent Fox buyout of DirecTV, the FCC made sure that Fox
> couldn't use their position as a content provider to competitive
> advantage.
>
>
> <cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:20040605201958.465$2p@newsreader.com...
>> "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
>>> <cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
>>> news:20040605174718.089$7y@newsreader.com...
>>>> MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
>>>>> My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV
>>>>> doesn't have the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much
>>>>> bandwidth to carry an HD video signal as it does a regular
>>>>> channel. The other situation is that frankly there just isn't
>>>>> that much HD programming available yet. Example, look at Voom,
>>>>> offering all those old, old movies and HD "demo" channels just to
>>>>> have something to call "HD".
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to see INHD on DTV.
>>>> Chip
>>>>
>>>
>>> Isn't INHD partially owned by Comcast? I doubt they are gonna sell
>>> it to Direct TV at any price.
>>
>> Didn't know that. You're probably right.
>> Chip
>>
>> --
>> -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
>> Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Comcast already withholds programming from DirecTV and has already won
the lawsuit filed by DirecTV. So there is precedence for them keeping
their stations of the satellite if they want to.

The Philadelphia local sports station is Comcast SportsNet and is owned
by Comcast. It shows all Phillies games during the week. Most (if not
all) local markets come with the local sportsnet station, except for
Philadelphia.

So by switching to DirecTV, I lose most Phillies games. MLB Extra
innings games where the Phillies play are blacked out. And the sportnet
station is not available with basic cable. I would need to spend another
$30/month to get the Phillies games.

DirecTV sued to get the station, but Comcast won. I haven't read the
decision, but as a consumer, I don't understand how they won.


--
David G.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 5:35:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

The reason Comcast won is because the affected channel was being
transmitted ENTIRELY by terrestrial means (a.k.a. fibre-optic cable).If
they had used satellite at all, their argument for denying the regional
sports channel from DirecTV would have been less than compelling and
DirecTV most likely would have prevailed in that instance.The court
seemed to buy the argument that Comcast did not have to let DirecTV
"tap" into their WHOLLY OWNED(proprietary) means of delivery.The
satellite airwaves as such are classified as a public transmission
domain (even though carriers charge fees to use the infrastructure) so
if you transmit by this delivery method,no access market restrictions
can be applied.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 8:05:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Besides, Cox is the local cable company and they carry it.
Chip


"Vince Stone" <vstone@spamadelphia.net> wrote:
> If Comcast tried withhold programming from DirecTV, expect the FCC to get
> involved.
> In the recent Fox buyout of DirecTV, the FCC made sure that Fox couldn't
> use their position as a content provider to competitive advantage.
>
> <cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:20040605201958.465$2p@newsreader.com...
> > "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:
> > > <cjdaytonjr@cox.net> wrote in message
> > > news:20040605174718.089$7y@newsreader.com...
> > > > MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
> > > >> My understanding of the situation is that right now DirecTV
> > > >> doesn't have the available bandwidth. It takes approx 8x as much
> > > >> bandwidth to carry an HD video signal as it does a regular
> > > >> channel. The other situation is that frankly there just isn't that
> > > >> much HD programming available yet. Example, look at Voom, offering
> > > >> all those old, old movies and HD "demo" channels just to have
> > > >> something to call "HD".
> > > >>
> > > >>I'd like to see INHD on DTV.
> > > > Chip
> > > >
> > >
> > > Isn't INHD partially owned by Comcast? I doubt they are gonna sell it
> > > to Direct TV at any price.
> >
> > Didn't know that. You're probably right.
> > Chip
> >
> > --
> > -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
> > Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
!