Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

results are in. Satellites win, cable loses.

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:28:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

As of March 31:

DirecTv 14,500,000

Dish 11,230,000

------------------------

Total 25,730,000


Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:34:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> As of March 31:
>
> DirecTv 14,500,000
>
> Dish 11,230,000
>
> ------------------------
>
> Total 25,730,000
>
> Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
> customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?

To be fair, a number of these cannot get cable. But you are right,
most would have stayed with cable if they were treated like they were valued.
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 1:48:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <20050505183403.420$GW@newsreader.com>,
cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:

> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > As of March 31:
> >
> > DirecTv 14,500,000
> >
> > Dish 11,230,000
> >
> > ------------------------
> >
> > Total 25,730,000
> >
> > Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
> > customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?
>
> To be fair, a number of these cannot get cable. But you are right,
> most would have stayed with cable if they were treated like they were valued.
> Chip

It's more often the other way around. Folks continue to suffer with
cable, because they cant get DirecTv.
Related resources
May 6, 2005 1:48:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Or just maybe they want HDTV...where cable beats the hell out of dbs.


"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-6BBC4E.04481306052005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <20050505183403.420$GW@newsreader.com>,
> cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
>
>> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> > As of March 31:
>> >
>> > DirecTv 14,500,000
>> >
>> > Dish 11,230,000
>> >
>> > ------------------------
>> >
>> > Total 25,730,000
>> >
>> > Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
>> > customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?
>>
>> To be fair, a number of these cannot get cable. But you are right,
>> most would have stayed with cable if they were treated like they were
>> valued.
>> Chip
>
> It's more often the other way around. Folks continue to suffer with
> cable, because they cant get DirecTv.
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 1:48:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Not to mention On-Demand. Much nicer to be able to watch a movie or
program on your schedule rather than be forced to watch it on their
schedule. A fair amount of programming on On-Demand is Hi-Def, also.


CIAO!

Ed N.


curmudgeon wrote:
> Or just maybe they want HDTV...where cable beats the hell out of dbs.
>
>
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 1:48:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Not true, many cable co. have no HDTV
"curmudgeon" <curmudgeon@buzzoff.net> wrote in message
news:zvJee.1323$yq3.163@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> Or just maybe they want HDTV...where cable beats the hell out of dbs.
>
>
> "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:jzwick3-6BBC4E.04481306052005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
>> In article <20050505183403.420$GW@newsreader.com>,
>> cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
>>
>>> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> > As of March 31:
>>> >
>>> > DirecTv 14,500,000
>>> >
>>> > Dish 11,230,000
>>> >
>>> > ------------------------
>>> >
>>> > Total 25,730,000
>>> >
>>> > Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
>>> > customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?
>>>
>>> To be fair, a number of these cannot get cable. But you are right,
>>> most would have stayed with cable if they were treated like they were
>>> valued.
>>> Chip
>>
>> It's more often the other way around. Folks continue to suffer with
>> cable, because they cant get DirecTv.
>
>
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 2:23:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <mqqdnTIugOYh8ObfRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Ed Nielsen
<egnlsn@comcast.net> wrote:

> Not to mention On-Demand. Much nicer to be able to watch a movie or
> program on your schedule rather than be forced to watch it on their
> schedule. A fair amount of programming on On-Demand is Hi-Def, also.


No one has *had* to watch anything on anyone else's schedule for about
25 years now.

You x-posted to a TiVo group, where time-shifting is beyond routine.
There might be some potential benefit in being able to record something
you missed by using On Demand, but the tradeoff -- having to deal with
cable -- is not worth it to me.

The hi-def issue will narrow as more sats go online.
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 3:08:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Ed Nielsen (egnlsn@comcast.net) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
> Not to mention On-Demand. Much nicer to be able to watch a movie or
> program on your schedule rather than be forced to watch it on their
> schedule.

I do this with all my DirecTV programming by using a DirecTiVo...

> A fair amount of programming on On-Demand is Hi-Def, also.

....and it's an HD DirecTiVo, so I get this, too.

I've never understood why cable companies waste so much bandwidth with
VOD when distributing DVRs to all their customers would do the same thing
for them. People wouldn't even have to program their DVRs...they could
be set up to record *all* of what is in the "On-Demand" list and have it
right there. It would be differerent if VOD wasn't free with your cable
subscription.

I guess the only answer is that cable DVRs don't work as well as cable VOD.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/ToDo.gif
May 6, 2005 4:27:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

On Fri, 6 May 2005 11:08:42 -0400, Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

>Ed Nielsen (egnlsn@comcast.net) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
>> Not to mention On-Demand. Much nicer to be able to watch a movie or
>> program on your schedule rather than be forced to watch it on their
>> schedule.
>
>I do this with all my DirecTV programming by using a DirecTiVo...
>
>> A fair amount of programming on On-Demand is Hi-Def, also.
>
>...and it's an HD DirecTiVo, so I get this, too.
>
>I've never understood why cable companies waste so much bandwidth with
>VOD when distributing DVRs to all their customers would do the same thing
>for them. People wouldn't even have to program their DVRs...they could
>be set up to record *all* of what is in the "On-Demand" list and have it
>right there. It would be differerent if VOD wasn't free with your cable
>subscription.
>
>I guess the only answer is that cable DVRs don't work as well as cable VOD.

Wrong.

I have the Comcast 2 tuner DVR and it's great. The VOD is a bonus. And
the VOD is not all free. There are pay movies/events in VOD too.

To say that distributing DVR's is the same as VOD is to show a severe
ignorance about VOD. Have you ever actually seen it? It's more than
just a schedule of TV shows. For example, there are short 9-15 minute
instructional videos for things like boating and golf. Please let us
all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
Sailing" on our DVR's.

Geeze Jeffie. Pull you head out of you ass before you post.

Sean
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 6:39:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <zvJee.1323$yq3.163@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
"curmudgeon" <curmudgeon@buzzoff.net> wrote:

> Or just maybe they want HDTV...where cable beats the hell out of dbs.

Hardly, but often it has a lower front end cost.


>
>
> "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:jzwick3-6BBC4E.04481306052005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> > In article <20050505183403.420$GW@newsreader.com>,
> > cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
> >
> >> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> > As of March 31:
> >> >
> >> > DirecTv 14,500,000
> >> >
> >> > Dish 11,230,000
> >> >
> >> > ------------------------
> >> >
> >> > Total 25,730,000
> >> >
> >> > Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
> >> > customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?
> >>
> >> To be fair, a number of these cannot get cable. But you are right,
> >> most would have stayed with cable if they were treated like they were
> >> valued.
> >> Chip
> >
> > It's more often the other way around. Folks continue to suffer with
> > cable, because they cant get DirecTv.
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 6:41:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <060520051023195204%affable@no.com.invalid>,
"Dr. Personality" <affable@no.com.invalid> wrote:

> In article <mqqdnTIugOYh8ObfRVn-vA@comcast.com>, Ed Nielsen
> <egnlsn@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Not to mention On-Demand. Much nicer to be able to watch a movie or
> > program on your schedule rather than be forced to watch it on their
> > schedule. A fair amount of programming on On-Demand is Hi-Def, also.
>
>
> No one has *had* to watch anything on anyone else's schedule for about
> 25 years now.
>
> You x-posted to a TiVo group, where time-shifting is beyond routine.
> There might be some potential benefit in being able to record something
> you missed by using On Demand, but the tradeoff -- having to deal with
> cable -- is not worth it to me.
>
> The hi-def issue will narrow as more sats go online.

DirecTv has already successfully launched the first of 3 birds targeted
for HDTV this year.
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 6:44:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

(Sean <none>) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
> To say that distributing DVR's is the same as VOD is to show a severe
> ignorance about VOD. Have you ever actually seen it? It's more than
> just a schedule of TV shows. For example, there are short 9-15 minute
> instructional videos for things like boating and golf. Please let us
> all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
> Sailing" on our DVR's.

If the cable company just set up 10 channels that sent the VOD stuff around
the clock, DVRs would record it just fine.

There's nothing magical about VOD from the cable company. When you request
it, your box gets assigned a dynamically assigned channel number to tune to.
Anybody that can tune to that channel will see the VOD stream. Other STBs
think the channel doesn't exist because they haven't been told about it,
but PC HDTV cards can see it just fine.

By distributing DVRs (which they are trying to do anyway), the cable company
could have saved all the money for the *huge* bandwidth needed for VOD. If
as few as 25% of customers try to play VOD at the same time, it will fail
because there isn't enough bandwidth. Wouldn't it be nice if they took that
bandwidth and gave you 100 more channels (or 20 more HD channels)?

Even PPV VOD could be downloaded to *every* DVR. You just wouldn't pay
for it unless you tried to watch it. As far as the user would be concerned,
the interface would be exactly the same as today...the only difference is
where the video is stored.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/BrokenInterne...
May 6, 2005 8:54:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

* Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:

> Please let us
> all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
> Sailing" on our DVR's.


I bet that one gets viewed 2x a week. If you have to watch a 11 minute
instructional video on how to sail in Heavy Weather I am sure the Coast
Guard would rather you kept your fat ass on the couch.

And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr Jack
Nicholas in 9 minutes. Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
doesnt, dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he got a
DVR.

--
David
May 6, 2005 8:54:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

On Fri, 06 May 2005 16:54:29 GMT, SINNER
<arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:

>* Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>
>> Please let us
>> all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
>> Sailing" on our DVR's.
>
>
>I bet that one gets viewed 2x a week. If you have to watch a 11 minute
>instructional video on how to sail in Heavy Weather I am sure the Coast
>Guard would rather you kept your fat ass on the couch.
>

Man. The ignorance on this Tivo NG is too much. As much as I'd like to
ignore this group, swatting around dolts like Davey is too much fun.

As a matter of fact Davey, the video on heavy weather sailing was very
good. There was a nice discussion on the changing stresses on the Rig
at various points in reefing sails and the potential repurcussions.

Since you're such an expert, why don't you give us the readers digest
version of that subject? Or are you better suited to just posting to
usenet while sitting your fat ass on your couch?


>And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr Jack
>Nicholas in 9 minutes.

Another subject you know nothing about. I guess those hours + hours +
hours + hours + hours of instructional programming on the golf channel
are just a waste. I'm sure when you get put in charge of programming,
they'll replace them with something usefull.


>Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
>doesnt,

Well, welcome to the subject being discussed. VOD is in fact something
cable has and sattelite doesn't. You finally said something that isn't
moronic.

>dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
>to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
>usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he got a
>DVR.


Bully for your friend. I use my VOD a lot. It's a nice thing to have
IN ADDITION to a dvr. You Tivo/sat rumpswabs have no idea what you're
missing.

Sean
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 10:04:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

(Sean <none>) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
> if, if, if. How about talking about the way things are? You posted
> about VOD which you obviously don't know much about.

Yeah, right. Other than some being PPV (none here is...it's all free
if you subscribe to the source channel), everything the local Comcast does
is the same as you describe. And, they spent a boatload of money on
bandwidth, and now they are going to spend a boatload of money on getting
their DVR service up to the quality that people expect. Luckily, they
can just pass it on to their customers with their twice-yearly 10% price
increase.

> Spare me your theories on how it could be dopne better. I'm sure
> Cable executives will be contacting you soon to redo their VOD
> business plan.

No, but they might be contacting DirecTV, who will be doing their version
of "VOD" using DVR devices. Or, they might be contacting TiVo, because
TiVo already has the concept of "hidden" videos built in...the VOD could
be stored there. So, maybe Comcast will call TiVo soon and make a deal
to use that sort of technology...oh, wait, they already did.

--
Jeff Rife | "I'll be back in five or six days."
|
| "No, you'll be back in five or six pieces."
| -- "The Lost World"
Anonymous
May 6, 2005 10:39:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <Xns964E7922E5136Louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.130>,
SINNER <arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:

> * Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>
> > Please let us
> > all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
> > Sailing" on our DVR's.
>
>
> I bet that one gets viewed 2x a week. If you have to watch a 11 minute
> instructional video on how to sail in Heavy Weather I am sure the Coast
> Guard would rather you kept your fat ass on the couch.
>
> And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr Jack
> Nicholas in 9 minutes. Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
> doesnt, dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
> to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
> usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he got a
> DVR.
>
> --
> David

50 million viewers of Satellite cant be wrong.
May 6, 2005 10:39:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

On Fri, 06 May 2005 18:39:52 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
wrote:

>In article <Xns964E7922E5136Louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.130>,
> SINNER <arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:
>
>> * Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>>
>> > Please let us
>> > all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
>> > Sailing" on our DVR's.
>>
>>
>> I bet that one gets viewed 2x a week. If you have to watch a 11 minute
>> instructional video on how to sail in Heavy Weather I am sure the Coast
>> Guard would rather you kept your fat ass on the couch.
>>
>> And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr Jack
>> Nicholas in 9 minutes. Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
>> doesnt, dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
>> to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
>> usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he got a
>> DVR.
>>
>> --
>> David
>
>50 million viewers of Satellite cant be wrong.

I guess that means 154 million (as of 2003) viewers of cable are
wrong.

Rather than take a Tivo/Sat rumpswab dolt like Jackies word for this,
let's look at some official data from

http://uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=10531&id3=USPIRG&


Although cable operators argue that they face serious competition from
the nation's two Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) providers, data
compiled by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) also confirm
that DBS, while growing in subscribers, appeals primarily to limited
subsets of consumers, and is unable to restrain cable's prices charged
to consumers at large.

....

This failure of DBS to restrain cable prices also reflects the fact
that DBS is popular primarily at two edges of the market - in rural
areas where there is no cable service at all, and among the minority
of consumers that are willing to pay stiff premiums to receive large
numbers of sports channels. DBS also has serious shortcomings that
limit its appeal to many cable subscribers. DBS cannot reach many
urban customers who lack a direct line of sight to the southern sky,
and dishes are often difficult to install in the multifamily dwelling
units that house approximately 30 percent of the U.S. population. DBS
is still not able to offer local broadcast channels in many markets.
Surveys indicate that 47 percent of cable subscribers would not
subscribe to satellite service for that reason alone. DBS is also
unable to offer customers the same bundles as cable operators,
including telephone services, and has been extremely slow in offering
efficient two-way high-speed Internet access services. Making matters
worse, as the major cable operators have completed their nationwide
upgrades to digital facilities, DBS loses the quality advantage it
previously could offer to lure high-end subscribers.


Lots more good real data instead of gibberish from Jackie the moron.

Sean
May 6, 2005 11:21:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

* Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:

> As a matter of fact Davey, the video on heavy weather sailing was
> very good. There was a nice discussion on the changing stresses on
> the Rig at various points in reefing sails and the potential
> repurcussions.

Which you should already be well aware of if you spent anytime at all
in a sailboat. If you havent, that video would get you in more
trouble than its worth. Like I said, Useless.

>
> Since you're such an expert, why don't you give us the readers
> digest version of that subject? Or are you better suited to just
> posting to usenet while sitting your fat ass on your couch?

Because then I would be liable, just like Comcast s/b for telling
inexperinced sailers, hey its easy and you to can be a quality salor
in 10 minutes, no thanks. The virtues and how to's of sailing are
best left to those that undestand it rather than regurgitata as youve
done above.

Its basically Jackass for wannabe sailors, no wonder you enjoyed it.

>
>
>>And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr
>>Jack Nicholas in 9 minutes.
>
> Another subject you know nothing about.

How the hell would you know? Whats your handicap shawnie boi?

> I guess those hours +
> hours + hours + hours + hours of instructional programming on the
> golf channel are just a waste.

So are the hours and hours of Bass Fishing instructional videos, your
point? You cant learn to golf sitting on the coah you moron.

> I'm sure when you get put in charge
> of programming, they'll replace them with something usefull.
>

And when you do, they will be going under.

>
>>Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
>>doesnt,
>
> Well, welcome to the subject being discussed. VOD is in fact
> something cable has and sattelite doesn't.

Like I said, So? Your DVR dosent have wishlists, shall we get into
that pissing contest? Probably not since you have to sit when you pee
it probably wont go far.

>
>>dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
>>to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
>>usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he
>>got a DVR.
>
>
> Bully for your friend. I use my VOD a lot.

Bully for you.

> It's a nice thing to
> have IN ADDITION to a dvr.

Its useless, just like that free space indicator you so desperately
desire.

--
David
May 6, 2005 11:21:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

On Fri, 06 May 2005 19:21:36 GMT, SINNER
<arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:

>* Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>
>> As a matter of fact Davey, the video on heavy weather sailing was
>> very good. There was a nice discussion on the changing stresses on
>> the Rig at various points in reefing sails and the potential
>> repurcussions.
>
>Which you should already be well aware of if you spent anytime at all
>in a sailboat. If you havent, that video would get you in more
>trouble than its worth. Like I said, Useless.
>

Go ahead Mr. Expert. let's hear your take on this. It's so simple
after all.




>Like I said, So? Your DVR dosent have wishlists, shall we get into
>that pissing contest? Probably not since you have to sit when you pee
>it probably wont go far.
>

Maybe you can just reread that looonnnnggg thread where others were
bitching about how useless the wishlist "feature" is.



Sean
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 1:33:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <Xns964E96B5632ADLouiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.130>,
SINNER <arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:

> * Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>
> > http://uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=10531&id3=USPIRG&
>
> August 2003!
>
> Yeah, nothing has changed since then...
>
> --
> David

and that link correctly says:

"cable rates have skyrocketed; service levels have declined;"
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 1:42:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

SINNER wrote:

> > Or do you have some evidence showing otherwise that you'd like to
> > share with us?
>
> Plenty, but you can find it yourself

In other words, "No, I don't."
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 2:29:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <MPG.1ce585329c8c45989d14@news.nabs.net>,
Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

> Even PPV VOD could be downloaded to *every* DVR. You just wouldn't pay
> for it unless you tried to watch it. As far as the user would be concerned,
> the interface would be exactly the same as today...the only difference is
> where the video is stored.

I believe that technology is already patented by TiVo.
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 3:38:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jack Zwick (jzwick3@mindspring.com) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
> In article <MPG.1ce585329c8c45989d14@news.nabs.net>,
> Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:
>
> > Even PPV VOD could be downloaded to *every* DVR. You just wouldn't pay
> > for it unless you tried to watch it. As far as the user would be concerned,
> > the interface would be exactly the same as today...the only difference is
> > where the video is stored.
>
> I believe that technology is already patented by TiVo.

DirecTV has stated they will use a similar thing with PPV in their NDS
DVR (I know...it's still vaporware).

But, Comcast is already partnered with TiVo. I suspect that they will
use this sort of technology to try and recover bandwidth as they realize
*they* are the ones with the crunch, not the satellite companies.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/FoxTrot/Blackboard.gif
May 7, 2005 4:19:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

* ric wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> SINNER wrote:

>> > Or do you have some evidence showing otherwise that you'd like to
>> > share with us?

>> Plenty, but you can find it yourself

> In other words, "No, I don't."

Funny, when I look those words up in Roget's I dont find those words to
convey the same meaning.

Add something or STFU.
--
David
No guts, no glory.
Anonymous
May 7, 2005 11:32:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

VOD services in my system lie between 588 & 630MHz, and the bandwidth is
not exclusive to VOD, either. Several other services in the mix. Not
even close to enough bandwidth for 100 channels.


CIAO!

Ed N.


Jeff Rife wrote: Wouldn't it be nice if they took that
> bandwidth and gave you 100 more channels (or 20 more HD channels)?
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 4:34:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Ed Nielsen (egnlsn@comcast.net) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
> VOD services in my system lie between 588 & 630MHz, and the bandwidth is
> not exclusive to VOD, either. Several other services in the mix. Not
> even close to enough bandwidth for 100 channels.

Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.

Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
users if VOD was popular.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/TreeChainsaw....
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:45:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:45:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:46:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:46:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:47:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:47:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:48:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:51:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:51:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:51:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
>
> Well, it's over 250Mbps of available space, which is over 80 channels at
> typical over-compressed cable bitrates, so I wasn't far off.
>
> Still, there has to be more bandwidth than that at the main cable plant,
> since otherwise the first 80 users of VOD would completely tie up the
> system. Even at the "neighborhood" level, it's likely you'd get 80
> users if VOD was popular.
>
There are 33 SD services and 5 HD services in that 48MHz bandwidth.

The thing about VOD is that it is quite popular. It is available to all
subscribers right off the bat. You don't even have to subscribe to
digital services to use it (except premiums )-- just have a DCT. Analog
STBs have not been installed for a few years, which makes that part even
easier. A large percentage of subscribers have upgraded from basic or
expanded basic service to add digital services. Some have gone back
down to basic or expanded basic. But they still have their DCT, which
makes VOD available to them.

Don't have to buy a TiVo (or other DVR) to use it. Don't have to train
that DVR on what to record. As you go through the menu, you may see
something that looks interesting enough to watch but you didn't even
know that it was out there, let alone record it. Perhaps even something
you saw a long time ago. This past season, many of our local high
school football games were available to watch, and there is other local
programming as well. Some of the PPV movies have a High Def version
available.

Too many pros to consider it anything other than a positive.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 3:55:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Sorry about all the duplicates. My client kept telling me that the
message wasn't sent because of a server problem.

Again, I apologize.


CIAO!

Ed N.
Anonymous
May 8, 2005 6:31:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Sean,

I changed to DTV about three years ago because of several reasons. First of
all the down time for cable was getting out of hand. The second reason was
the cost was getting out of hand. The third reason was because the poor
customer service and attitude was getting out of hand. They all just got
worse as time went on. Cable chased me away!

When I started with cable I took down my big expensive antenna and had them
hook me up. Cable was 25 cents per month for limited basic and that was not
a special offer either. That went to $0.50 in a year. Next to $5.00 in
just over a year.. next it went to something like $14.00 and so on. In a
period of about 10 years it got up to where I was spending about $50.00 a
month or so before the charges for HBO. I ask you, what other business can
raise rates that aggressively and still remain in business? With this past
history, how long do you thing it will be before cable springs the trap on
VOD? You have to know they must be planning to hook as many people as they
can for a period of time and then will most likely charge for it. And if
(when) they do, I bet the rates will clime rapidly! This is cable's history.
Why would they change now?

I lived on a cul-de-sac up until about a month ago. There were 13 houses on
that street and all started with cable. There was only one that was still on
Comcast when I left. When you looked at the surrounding neighborhoods,
dishes were popping up every where. I actually changed because I kept
hearing from my neighbors how much better the DBS was then the cable and I
was becoming more and more frustrated with cables problems and poor service.

The one exception is that I do miss the higher speed internet, but my DSL is
half the price or less and it works fine... and I use it a lot... which is
why I was so pissed off at Comcast when they went down so often, and for a
period of over a day on several occasions.

Then there is TiVo.. that indeed has me hooked. I find I don't sit in front
of the TV and channel surf any where near as much as before. I do the time
shift like everyone else.. and although it does cost $4.99 a month.. it's
worth it! I love my TiVo!

Craig


"Sean" <none> wrote in message
news:h8gn71hakejl2mf65rbo16obes19478dfn@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 06 May 2005 18:39:52 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <Xns964E7922E5136Louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.130>,
>> SINNER <arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:
>>
>>> * Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>>>
>>> > Please let us
>>> > all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
>>> > Sailing" on our DVR's.
>>>
>>>
>>> I bet that one gets viewed 2x a week. If you have to watch a 11 minute
>>> instructional video on how to sail in Heavy Weather I am sure the Coast
>>> Guard would rather you kept your fat ass on the couch.
>>>
>>> And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr Jack
>>> Nicholas in 9 minutes. Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
>>> doesnt, dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
>>> to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
>>> usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he got a
>>> DVR.
>>>
>>> --
>>> David
>>
>>50 million viewers of Satellite cant be wrong.
>
> I guess that means 154 million (as of 2003) viewers of cable are
> wrong.
>
> Rather than take a Tivo/Sat rumpswab dolt like Jackies word for this,
> let's look at some official data from
>
> http://uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=10531&id3=USPIRG&
>
>
> Although cable operators argue that they face serious competition from
> the nation's two Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) providers, data
> compiled by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) also confirm
> that DBS, while growing in subscribers, appeals primarily to limited
> subsets of consumers, and is unable to restrain cable's prices charged
> to consumers at large.
>
> ...
>
> This failure of DBS to restrain cable prices also reflects the fact
> that DBS is popular primarily at two edges of the market - in rural
> areas where there is no cable service at all, and among the minority
> of consumers that are willing to pay stiff premiums to receive large
> numbers of sports channels. DBS also has serious shortcomings that
> limit its appeal to many cable subscribers. DBS cannot reach many
> urban customers who lack a direct line of sight to the southern sky,
> and dishes are often difficult to install in the multifamily dwelling
> units that house approximately 30 percent of the U.S. population. DBS
> is still not able to offer local broadcast channels in many markets.
> Surveys indicate that 47 percent of cable subscribers would not
> subscribe to satellite service for that reason alone. DBS is also
> unable to offer customers the same bundles as cable operators,
> including telephone services, and has been extremely slow in offering
> efficient two-way high-speed Internet access services. Making matters
> worse, as the major cable operators have completed their nationwide
> upgrades to digital facilities, DBS loses the quality advantage it
> previously could offer to lure high-end subscribers.
>
>
> Lots more good real data instead of gibberish from Jackie the moron.
>
> Sean
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 12:24:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <427E5298.30406@comcast.net>,
Ed Nielsen <egnlsn@comcast.net> wrote:

> Sorry about all the duplicates. My client kept telling me that the
> message wasn't sent because of a server problem.
>
> Again, I apologize.
>
>
> CIAO!
>
> Ed N.

Sorry, Cable has zero credibility.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 12:24:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Jack Zwick wrote:

> Sorry, Cable has zero credibility.

And, you have lost yours.
Anonymous
May 9, 2005 6:06:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

In article <427E779C.C4099F17@home.com>, ric <nospam@home.com> wrote:

> Jack Zwick wrote:
>
> > Sorry, Cable has zero credibility.
>
> And, you have lost yours.

I am proud to be judged by the minority that would think so.
May 9, 2005 3:49:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

On Fri, 6 May 2005 18:04:32 -0400, Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

> (Sean <none>) wrote in rec.video.satellite.dbs:
>> if, if, if. How about talking about the way things are? You posted
>> about VOD which you obviously don't know much about.
>
>Yeah, right. Other than some being PPV (none here is...it's all free
>if you subscribe to the source channel), everything the local Comcast does
>is the same as you describe. And, they spent a boatload of money on
>bandwidth, and now they are going to spend a boatload of money on getting
>their DVR service up to the quality that people expect. Luckily, they
>can just pass it on to their customers with their twice-yearly 10% price
>increase.
>
>> Spare me your theories on how it could be dopne better. I'm sure
>> Cable executives will be contacting you soon to redo their VOD
>> business plan.
>
>No, but they might be contacting DirecTV, who will be doing their version
>of "VOD" using DVR devices. Or, they might be contacting TiVo, because
>TiVo already has the concept of "hidden" videos built in...the VOD could
>be stored there. So, maybe Comcast will call TiVo soon and make a deal
>to use that sort of technology...oh, wait, they already did.


Oh, give me a break.

I read somewhere that Comcast was talking to Sony about getting access
to their catalog of movies for their VOD.

That's thousands of titles.

I suppose you, Mr. Engineer, would propose the best way to make
thousands of movies available is to use DVR technology?

Give it up.

Next thing we'll hear is that the next release of Tivo will cure
static cling.

Sean
May 9, 2005 3:50:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

On Sun, 08 May 2005 13:33:32 -0700, ric <nospam@home.com> wrote:

>Jack Zwick wrote:
>
>> Sorry, Cable has zero credibility.
>
>And, you have lost yours.

He never had any.

He's a DTV TIVO rumpswab.

Soon we'll be hearing Jackie and his ilk crying a river when they
get their new NDS DVR.

Sean
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 1:10:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-6BBC4E.04481306052005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <20050505183403.420$GW@newsreader.com>,
> cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
>
>> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> > As of March 31:
>> >
>> > DirecTv 14,500,000
>> >
>> > Dish 11,230,000
>> >
>> > ------------------------
>> >
>> > Total 25,730,000
>> >
>> > Comcast, Warner, Cox, Charter and friends have scared away 25 million
>> > customers, what's that: 60 million viewers?
>>
>> To be fair, a number of these cannot get cable. But you are right,
>> most would have stayed with cable if they were treated like they were
>> valued.
>> Chip
>
> It's more often the other way around. Folks continue to suffer with
> cable, because they cant get DirecTv.

I haven't suffered at all with cable. I have Time Warner MN, they must be
really good relative to other cable companies because in the five years I've
had them, I've had no outages that I can recall. And RoadRunnerMN is
consistently over 4 Mbps. Plus their service is pretty good.
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 1:33:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

Adam Corolla wrote:

> > It's more often the other way around. Folks continue to suffer with
> > cable, because they cant get DirecTv.
>
> I haven't suffered at all with cable. I have Time Warner MN, they must be
> really good relative to other cable companies because in the five years I've
> had them, I've had no outages that I can recall. And RoadRunnerMN is
> consistently over 4 Mbps. Plus their service is pretty good.

Indeed. I've had Cox analog cable since 1973, and their HSI service since
1998. I have a DirecTV system in my closet because the Cox analog has
better video. DirecTV had better audio, but I couldn't put up with the
video. The Cox analog video is almost as good as my C/Ku-band dish (which
I use extensive for sports feeds) except on some of the upper channels,
which have more video noise. But I still find this less offensive than
the over compressed digital on DirecTV.

Had an outage last week. It was the first one I could remember in several
years. Lasted about an hour. I read the paper instead.
Anonymous
May 10, 2005 11:09:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

> Indeed. I've had Cox analog cable since 1973, and their HSI service since
> 1998. I have a DirecTV system in my closet because the Cox analog has
> better video. DirecTV had better audio, but I couldn't put up with the
> video. The Cox analog video is almost as good as my C/Ku-band dish (which
> I use extensive for sports feeds) except on some of the upper channels,
> which have more video noise. But I still find this less offensive than
> the over compressed digital on DirecTV.
>
> Had an outage last week. It was the first one I could remember in several
> years. Lasted about an hour. I read the paper instead.

Maybe so, ric, but your one anecdotal story doesn't make it true for
everybody or even the majority. I have Cox as well, including HSI and
the analog quality in my house is nothing to write home about, plus it
regularly gets worse. It is *definitely* affected by poor weather and
in only 2 years I've had at least 3 outages that have lasted an entire
evening or more, plus one for over a week (caused by Hurricane Frances).
Worse, there has been uncountable incidences of loss or poor quality
on particular channels.

Does this mean *everyone's* cable experience is like mine? No, but
neither are they all like yours either.

Randy S.
Anonymous
May 13, 2005 12:21:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

> 4. HD programming was about the same for Dish or cable. To be fair,
> the signal quality on cable HD was every bit as good as Dish.
> However, Dish now offers HDNET, DISCOVERY HD, TNT HD, ESPN HD, HDNET
> MOVIES, and the new VOOM ten pack including ULTRA HD, MONSTERS HD,
> RAVE HD, EQUATOR HD, GALLERY HD, ANIMANIA HD, RUSH HD, HD NEWS, GUY TV
> HD, and MAJESTIC HD. The VOOM channels only cost $5 over the basic HD
> package.
> 21 additional VOOM channels are coming to DISH this fall!! This far
> exceeds anything cable offers today. I did not include the HD movie
> channels Showtime HD and HBO HD as these are automatically included if
> you subscribe to those SD packages and also have the HD pack.

Is Dish offering VOOM's old channels? How did they end up with that? I
know VOOM finally went under, but didn't know what happened to them
after that.

Randy S.
May 13, 2005 4:39:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

"Randy S." <rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>
>> 4. HD programming was about the same for Dish or cable. To be fair,
>> the signal quality on cable HD was every bit as good as Dish.
>> However, Dish now offers HDNET, DISCOVERY HD, TNT HD, ESPN HD, HDNET
>> MOVIES, and the new VOOM ten pack including ULTRA HD, MONSTERS HD,
>> RAVE HD, EQUATOR HD, GALLERY HD, ANIMANIA HD, RUSH HD, HD NEWS, GUY TV
>> HD, and MAJESTIC HD. The VOOM channels only cost $5 over the basic HD
>> package.
>> 21 additional VOOM channels are coming to DISH this fall!! This far
>> exceeds anything cable offers today. I did not include the HD movie
>> channels Showtime HD and HBO HD as these are automatically included if
>> you subscribe to those SD packages and also have the HD pack.
>
>Is Dish offering VOOM's old channels? How did they end up with that? I
>know VOOM finally went under, but didn't know what happened to them
>after that.
>
>Randy S.

Yes, 10 of the HD VOOM channels are now on DISH with 21 more coming
this fall. The quality of the video signal on these channels is
outstanding and some of the folks who moved from VOOM to DISH report
that the channels actually look better than when they were on VOOM. I
can not say that since I never saw a VOOM broadcast, but I can say
that the quality is outstanding. The pessimist in me says the quality
may be very high because their are a limited number of channels
currently available but who knows.
May 13, 2005 4:43:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo,rec.video.satellite.dbs (More info?)

"Randy S." <rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote:


>Is Dish offering VOOM's old channels? How did they end up with that? I
>know VOOM finally went under, but didn't know what happened to them
>after that.
>
>Randy S.


OOPS! You asked how they ended up with VOOM channels and I forgot to
answer. DISH bought the satellite from VOOM and I guess that they
worked out a deal with their programming. The channels would have
just gone silent until the packages were sold to others so DISH had a
perfect opportunity to be first.
!