Thanks for the heads up. I knew they had 8 exclusive NFL games this year, but I didn't know they were late-season (the ones that count).
At least that gives Posg more time to make excuses for TWC not having the channel yet.

Also I think you need to find the email address of someone higher up the food chain. As it's been stated TWC can't add channels regionally. So in other words Dressler has no input on what national channels get added. IMHO

My guess, and it is only a guess, that the joint acquistion of Adelphia by TWC/Comcast will involve some footprint cluster restructuring, so all parties are avoiding being in the middle of contract negotiations which would futher complicate the transition.

Only a guess. But there's always DirecTV and Dish for those who can't wait.

Found it last night. It was the Neilson encoder screwing it up prior to my encoder. They add data to the video and audio for ratings collection. It picked last night to get worse, but at least bad enough for us to catch it in the act.

Thanks for all your help!

Great! I'm glad you found it.

One more question: I watched Friday's "Conviction" last night, and I noticed that it had the "sparkles" bigtime. If you watch a scene that is dark, or closely watch somebody in a dark suit, you notice lots of little white dots appearing at random. It looks almost like "snow" from an analog signal. Was this also from the Neilson encoder?

Drew

In case anyone's interested, here's a comprehensive article regarding the status of the Adelphia/Comcast/Time Warner menage a tois, which may lend some insight as to why none of the parties are making any major programming moves, particularly related to sports.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6304924.html

Found it last night. It was the Neilson encoder screwing it up prior to my encoder. They add data to the video and audio for ratings collection. It picked last night to get worse, but at least bad enough for us to catch it in the act.

Thanks for all your help!
Kewl, thx for the hard work. :)

Neilson encoder

How does this encoder no who is watching what channel?

-DonB2

Thanks NBC17ENG, I will pm you from now on when I see a problem.

We do appricate your help. :)

Dressler is the top of the food chain. He's the Exec VP for Programming for Time Warner Cable (corporate). You're right though ... the local TWC execs are absolutely powerless about carriage agreements.

My Bad. :o
I thought it was stated he was the regional VP.

My guess, and it is only a guess, that the joint acquistion of Adelphia by TWC/Comcast will involve some footprint cluster restructuring, so all parties are avoiding being in the middle of contract negotiations which would futher complicate the transition.

Only a guess. But there's always DirecTV and Dish for those who can't wait.

I am setup for my DISH install tomorrow. And if a hefty Tip and a Chainsaw can't get it done, I'll try the same with DirecTv. :p

Even if TWC adds ESPN2-HD and NFL this year, I'll bet DISH and DirecTv have HGTV-HD, FOOD-HD, and NG-HD for more than a year before TWC gets them.

Not to bash, but to share the wealth that TWC billing isn't exactly faultless (as aspersions have been cast at the Sat companies), I didn't have to dig this up, it happened to me...

-mid Mar.. called to cancel cable*but not RR) (to switch to Sat), cancel accepted
-called back to confirm cancel.. was offered Digipic 1000 (my existing level of service) at $XX... accepted this offer.. warned them about the existing cancel work order, was told no cancel in system, no worries
- next day... cable disconnected.. sigh.. called for reconnect.. explained offer I had been given which was re-applied by someone not in the retention dept, told no problem all was well again.
- next bill (mid April)... a mess of credits, pkgs, etc.... noticed that my RR special had been cancelled, and that the HD Suite ($7) had been added without my asking... so my new bill was >= to my bill before the retention pkg (funny how that works...)
- day after next bill.. called and got RR special re-instated, ask for HD Suite removal, thought that would corrrect everything
- early May... Bill+2 comes... RR svc now correct.. HD Suite STILL on my bill, and Digipic 1000 price is still $XX + $7 (I am not including the cost of the HD DVR, I knew that would be $XX + $7, but now I am being billed $XX + $7 + $7)

Can't wait to see what shenanigans show up on the next bill. And yes, I have notes, and names documenting all calls (except mid-Apr). Its just not worth the fight. I'll be looking at Sat again when I have more time. So if I seem biased against TWC, I think its rather justified.

Be sure to check those bills carefully.

Mike

Just incase nobody noticed, TWC added a new channel sometime withing the last few days. No, no don't get excited. :D It's no HD channel nor a sports channel either. It's TWC ch.194 EWTN: Eternal Word TV Network. ;)

I am setup for my DISH install tomorrow. And if a hefty Tip and a Chainsaw can't get it done, I'll try the same with DirecTv. :p

Even if TWC adds ESPN2-HD and NFL this year, I'll bet DISH and DirecTv have HGTV-HD, FOOD-HD, and NG-HD for more than a year before TWC gets them.
quility VS quanity for me. you will have more channels but they just wont be the same quility. you may say you dont care but you will see what im saying. i liked dish so much that i cancelled it 2 and a half days later. directV? if your even considering DirectV you cant be that much into HD.

If you think TWC's billing is bad now (it is), what do you think it would be like with "a la carte"?

Just incase nobody noticed, TWC added a new channel sometime withing the last few days. No, no don't get excited. :D It's no HD channel nor a sports channel either. It's TWC ch.194 EWTN: Eternal Word TV Network. ;)

Great. Yet another religious channel. They have no problem adding religious, shopping or hispanic channels.

Great. Yet another religious channel. They have no problem adding religious, shopping or hispanic channels.

At least EWTN doesn't have Benny Hinn.

quility VS quanity for me. you will have more channels but they just wont be the same quility. you may say you dont care but you will see what im saying. i liked dish so much that i cancelled it 2 and a half days later. directV? if your even considering DirectV you cant be that much into HD.

You are on the record yet again that Cable quality is better. Do you just cut and paste or actually type it each time ? :)

I just got DISH with HD installed at my moms, and was more than pleased with the quality and the quantity took some time just to get thru. Other than what I always notice between her 50" Sony Wega LCD Projection and my 62" Toshiba DLP the HD is great. I see screen door effect on hers even on OTA.

Your DirecTv comment puts alot of weight with INHD. Sports fans would rather have ESPN2-HD, NFL-HD, and NFL Package in HD, not to mention both DISH and DirecTv being able to record WB-HD via OTA.

They have no problem adding religious, shopping or hispanic channels.
Ya, I have to ask myself, how many people with a Digital Box are going to be watching black religion channels. I just dont understand it..

Ya, I have to ask myself, how many people with a Digital Box are going to be watching black religion channels. I just dont understand it..
I'm fairly sure there are people with digital boxes who are both black and religious.

I set my STB to output 720p, 480p and 480i only, without 1080i selected. From time-to-time (about 1 or 2 times per week) the box gets changed to 1080i only, and not the other 3 I have chosen.

Is anyone else getting a similar experience? Anyone have an explanation for this? I am certain it is not being changed by anyone in the household.

It's ironic that a device which is intended to confirm viewership is actually causing viewers to tune out. :eek: :eek: :eek:
LMAO! True, so true. They have an "undefeatable system". It encodes data in the vertical interval, on the top line of active video, and in the audio bits. Naturally, the video bits don't survive the compression, but the audio makes it through. It "watermarks" the stream to identify the source, and verify to them it is actually on the air. Analog has one also, but it has not given the problems the HD unit has had.

Sparkles is an odd thing for digital. I expect it is the cause, but only time will tell. You guys and gals will have to let me know if it is gone while their encoder is bypassed.

They reported the log file was full of errors, but they dialed into it all day today and it was rock steady. During the Soaps, I punched direct to the sat dish, and it went crazy. Interesting, but bewildering. My career is never boring!

If you think TWC's billing is bad now (it is), what do you think it would be like with "a la carte"?

That is probably the first real reason not to go to "a la carte" I have heard.
Of course every time I shop at Walmart, I buy "a la carte". And they seem to figure it out. ;)

I'm fairly sure there are people with digital boxes who are both black and religious.
I never said there wasnt. I said, "how many". Stop trying to find something to be offended about.

I never said there wasnt. I said, "how many". Stop trying to find something to be offended about.

You said how many people with digital boxes are going to be watching? What you basically said was that the kind of people who watch digital TV are not black and religious. There are probably more who watch those channels than a good chunk of what's on the digital tier and definitely more than CurrentTV.

I set my STB to output 720p, 480p and 480i only, without 1080i selected. From time-to-time (about 1 or 2 times per week) the box gets changed to 1080i only, and not the other 3 I have chosen.

Is anyone else getting a similar experience? Anyone have an explanation for this? I am certain it is not being changed by anyone in the household.

I'm having a similar problem. My 8300 keeps setting the parental lock function to on. I keep having to disable it every day. Not sure what is causing it.

http://www.betanews.com/article/Cox_Considers_Offering_TiVo_DVRs/1147116404

Interesting article that I found this morning. Apparently Cox has been sending out surveys to some subscribers to feel out their thoughts on replacing the DVR's they have with TiVo systems..

I have a TV in my bedroom that has a straight cable hookup (no cable box). This TV has gone belly up. I was thinking of replacing it with a small HD LCD. Is it true that even if the new TV has a tuner, it still will not pick up HD with just a straight cable(TWC) hookup? If this is true, then I guess there is no point in spending the extra bucks for a HD TV.

If you think TWC's billing is bad now (it is), what do you think it would be like with "a la carte"?

Lessee.. justifying a lousy prodcut model by emphasizing the company's incompetence... hmmm :)

What do I think? I think THAT (a la carte) would be worth the effort. When I'm stuck buying 100 ch's I don't want (just to get the HD channels), that is not.

Besides, any 2 year old (except those working at TWC billing) could design a web or cable-box-interactive interface to allow easy channel selection.

Mike

Is it true that even if the new TV has a tuner, it still will not pick up HD with just a straight cable(TWC) hookup?
That's not necessarily true.

If the TV has a QAM tuner, then it can receive the unencrypted HD channels (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, and PBS). If the TV also has a slot for a CableCARD, and a CableCARD has been installed, then it can also receive any encrypted HD channels that you have subscribed to.

tommy122 ,

And a TV can have a ATSC tuner but still not have QAM capability. You really need to read the specs of each tv to see what they have or don't have included.

Cable Card capability would probably be better as it would decode while QAM will only show those digital Channels that are free to air.

-DonB2

Sparkles is an odd thing for digital. I expect it is the cause, but only time will tell. You guys and gals will have to let me know if it is gone while their encoder is bypassed.

Last night "The Apprentice" was chock full of them. They were also present on the local 17 news @ 11.

When I freeze the image on my 8300 YD and examine them they appear as completely distinct white spots. (I could probably count their pixel size if that would be helpful) While the the image is in motion they seem to pop in and out in a random manner like dust spots on a film. Although they don't appear to show any particular regularity or organization I somehow get the impression of movement from the bottom of the image toward the top.

I plan on keeping a notebook with me and logging what I notice and will PM you with what I record.

BTW - I'm very impressed and grateful that you have the dedication and professionalism to be a participant in this forum and have been so solicitious of viewer input about your signal! Thanks!

yes, the sparkles are still very much there and in full effect.

I watched a little OTA ATSC NBC last night and did not see what is being described as sparkles.

I will keep looking.

-DonB2

I watched a little OTA ATSC NBC last night and did not see what is being described as sparkles.

I will keep looking.

-DonB2

They're there. Look in the black side bars of 4:3 source material, assuming you're not using the "Stretch-O-Rama" mode. Looks like EMI-Lite. (EMI=electromechanical interference, sometimes seen on weak VHF channels OTA)

The more important question is...
What was on NBC last night worth watching ? :D

The more important question is...
What was on NBC last night worth watching ? :D

"Headlines" on Leno. Nothing else. Poor peacock. It's been pretty sad since they moved all the good stuff to "Universal HD". ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

I sometimes get 'pulsing' in the HD picture here, where when black backgrounds are shown the picture will pulse making the blacks go black, light lack, black , light black etc.
It almost is exclusively a CH. 211 ABC-HD problem.
Am I the only one?

What are the main HD channels we are missing, based on Industry quality reviews? I mean Universal-HD stinks in my opinion so I would rather lose that and get ESPN2HD or National Geographig HD.
So, my question is (caus ei am sure I dont know all the quality HD channels out there), what are the 'best' HD channels we are not getting?
I wil lstart the list with:
ESPN2-HD
National Geographic-HD

Basic HD channels available but not currently carried are:
ESPN2 (limited HD content)
National Geographic
MHD (MTV)
HGTV
NFL Network (limited HD content)
Wealth TV

HD Pay channels not currently available:
Cinemax
The Movie Channel
Starz

HD Broadcast Networks not currently carried:
WB
UPN (local affiltiate does not offer HD)

miss anything ???

Guess who has ESPN2-HD and the NFL Network along with 21 other HD channels?
Here's a hint: It's not Posg. :)

And man the OTA tuner in my new Vip622 is 10 times better than the one built in my TV. I can record WB-HD too.

Hey TWC, so long sucka. :D

Guess who has ESPN2-HD and the NFL Network along with 21 other HD channels?
Here's a hint: It's not Posg. :)

And man the OTA tuner in my new Vip622 is 10 times better than the one built in my TV. I can record WB-HD too.

Hey TWC, so long sucka. :D

I take it the installation was a success??? Enjoy !!!

P.S.

It looks like the week between today and next Tuesday, ESPN2 has 12.5 total hours of HD programming. 8.5 of that is programmed between Midnight and 6AM. I'm not sure NFL Network has any HD this week, they don't indicate any HD on their website.

"They're there. Look in the black side bars of 4:3 source material, assuming you're not using the "Stretch-O-Rama" mode. Looks like EMI-Lite. (EMI=electromechanical interference, sometimes seen on weak VHF channels OTA)"

I was thinking Solar flare ups.

I agree that overall there is not much I have been watching on NBC so consequently would probably miss seeing the sparkles.

Last night I happened to catch some show on NBC at 10pm I think with Frasier"Kelsey Grammer" in it.

PBS has not had much to offer either lately. I use to like watching the Nova and science types shows but IMHO that Texas Cowboy series that they have tieing up prime time recently is garbage. And so was the one they had a few years ago with Pilgrims living the Pilgrim life.

And than to add insult to injury PBS has the Cowboy show on 5.1 and the HD 5.2 simultaneously so there is no alternative programming to watch.

-DonB2

P.S.

It looks like the week between today and next Tuesday, ESPN2 has 12.5 total hours of HD programming. 8.5 of that is programmed between Midnight and 6AM. I'm not sure NFL Network has any HD this week, they don't indicate any HD on their website.

Total time in HD is not the point. It's quality ... not quantity. You tell me- would you rather watch live MLB on ESPN2HD or the circa 1975 repeat garbage on Universal HD? InHD, InHD2, etc. are nice, but they just repeat the same shows over and over. Point being ... of course, we all wish that all channels were 24/7 HD, but I could really care less to see "PTI" and "Around the Horn" in HD. ESPNs HD content value (on ESPNHD and ESPN2HD) is in live sports ... which we are missing out on by not having ESPN2HD.

OK here's the challenge.

Go to the following website:

http://hd.espn.com/hd/

Using the tabs at the top of the schedule, review ESPN2's schedule for the week. INHD carries live NBA, NHL, MLB. Where's all the live HD sports on ESPN2???? Notta, nothing. I'm just don't see what I'm missing.

And NFL Network??? They have raised the asking price from 20-25 cents/month/sub to 50-75 cents/month/sub. With 500,000 subscribers in the Raleigh cluster, that's $3,000,000/year. No matter how you slice it, that's a lot for 8 lousy games/year.

OK here's the challenge.

Go to the following website:

http://hd.espn.com/hd/

Using the tabs at the top of the schedule, review ESPN2's schedule for the week. INHD carries live NBA, NHL, MLB. Where's all the live HD sports on ESPN2???? Notta, nothing. I'm just don't see what I'm missing.

And NFL Network??? They have raised the asking price from 20-25 cents/month/sub to 50-75 cents/month/sub. With 500,000 subscribers in the Raleigh cluster, that's $3,000,000/year. No matter how you slice it, that's a lot for 8 lousy games/year.

InHD buys games from other networks ... which is fine with me. I'm not dissing them in terms of sports. I'm grateful for it. But, ESPN is increasing the number of live sporting events that they are putting on ESPN2HD (MLB, upcoming Soccer World Cup). I, personally, don't care for all of the sports that ESPN shows (ex. soccer, drag racing, etc.) in HD, but it is certainly better than NOT having it.

As for the NFL Network ... you're right- the NFL is increasing its asking price-- and they should. The network is an advertising bonanza and is raking in money. All of the other major cable providers did not have a problem with carriage agreements-- just TWC. Now we're really screwed since TWC could have had it years ago at half the price. You're right about one thing-- TWC will never pay for it now, no matter how many of their customers beg for it. They don't give a damn-- their attitude is if you don't like us, leave.

I would love to get National Geographic HD as well as many of the others listed. The problem that is frustrating all of us on this and other forums, is that TWC does NOTHING!!!!!! They are always last to add anything of substance.

NFL Network is already putting pressure on Dish Network to put it on a lower lever tier.

Between ESPN, retransmission cash payments for network broadcast channels, and now NFL network, the NFL is probably gets 10% of my monthly cable payment.

If there were ever an argument for a la carte, subsidizing sport leagues is it.

And if the NFL Network is an "advertising bonanza raking in the money", why do they need to raise their carriage fees 125% ???

NFL Network is already putting pressure on Dish Network to put it on a lower lever tier.

Between ESPN, retransmission cash payments for network broadcast channels, and now NFL network, the NFL is probably gets 10% of my monthly cable payment.

If there were ever an argument for a la carte, subsidizing sport leagues is it..

Hey, I'd gladly pay for quality sports (especially in HD) over the garbage that I'm forced to pay for now ... SD and HD.

I'm probably really gonna regret saying this, but I'm not a big sports fan. I don't have any problem with anyone who is, but I'm not. So much of the high cost programming on both broadcast and subscription television is sports, that it is incumbant that a cable or satellite provider look after the interests of ALL subscribers.

The fact that networks like ESPN and NFL have severe rate penalties for providers who place their channels on anything less than a universal package is not really fair to those who don't really want them. It's incumbant upon cable operators and satellite operators to keep these guys and cable/satellite rates somewhat under control by being hard negotiators. Sports is a huge part of the reason cable/sat rates are as high as they already are. I applaud the efforts of those who try to keep them somewhat under control.

Posg (or any other DISH hater :rolleyes: ),
I now have 29 HD channels. How many do you have? :(

Yea, I agree that the NFL Network won't pay for itself until I am watching those 8 games I couldn't on TWC. And I am sure they are going to have lots more compelling content with all the money they are throwing into it. And ESPN2-HD will be hit and miss just like all the ESPNs. Rest assure though once college basketball bounces around again, I would sooner give up my first born than be without it. :)

Did I tell ya, I got a 30sec skip now. :cool: Oh and I have already deleted all the channels I don't want to see from the guide.

I'm probably really gonna regret saying this, but I'm not a big sports fan. I don't have any problem with anyone who is, but I'm not. So much of the high cost programming on both broadcast and subscription television is sports, that it is incumbant that a cable or satellite provider look after the interests of ALL subscribers.

The fact that networks like ESPN and NFL have severe rate penalties for providers who place their channels on anything less than a universal package is not really fair to those who don't really want them. It's incumbant upon cable operators and satellite operators to keep these guys and cable/satellite rates somewhat under control by being hard negotiators. Sports is a huge part of the reason cable/sat rates are as high as they already are. I applaud the efforts of those who try to keep them somewhat under control.

Sounds like you're for "a la carte" now.
Look forward to seeing you at the meetings. :)

I believe it is time to go another route.

George.Bodenheimer@ESPN.com
VP of Programming at ESPN

I watched a little OTA ATSC NBC last night and did not see what is being described as sparkles.

I will keep looking.

-DonB2
I'm watching it free over the air also, and do not see it. Can you clear up my confusion, is it [sparkles] in the active picture, or just the black side bars? I didn't get a chance to review my 8300 primetime recording, but I did watch Medium at home. (I thought Kelsey Grammer looked better than he has in years, but could be the haircut)

BTW: We made a little cable swap, and put the Nielson encoder back online this afternoon. We may have to move it ahead in the program stream, but they can not determine what exactly went haywire.

I'm watching it free over the air also, and do not see it. Can you clear up my confusion, is it [sparkles] in the active picture, or just the black side bars?

I checked my recording of last night's SVU, and the sparkles were still there. The sparkles are not just in the 4:3 side bars for 4:3 material, they are in the active picture of 1080i HD shows. They are very easy to see in the opening seconds of Law & Order shows, when they have the black screen with the Law and Order logo.

This was recorded via QAM from TWC.

If you think it would help (and promise not to sue me :), I could probably get you the first few megs of the mpeg stream..

Drew

I'm watching it free over the air also, and do not see it. Can you clear up my confusion, is it [sparkles] in the active picture, or just the black side bars? I didn't get a chance to review my 8300 primetime recording, but I did watch Medium at home. (I thought Kelsey Grammer looked better than he has in years, but could be the haircut)

BTW: We made a little cable swap, and put the Nielson encoder back online this afternoon. We may have to move it ahead in the program stream, but they can not determine what exactly went haywire.

They're back!!! At least on the Today Show. OTA & TWC in both the active picture area and the grey side bars.

Posg (or any other DISH hater :rolleyes: ),
I now have 29 HD channels. How many do you have? :(


This is the point in the debate where the TWC fans generally clam up rather than conceding the point. By my count, no matter how much you pay TWC has at most ~19 HD channels (assuming you even count "Movies On Demand HD" as a channel), and this puts you in the $90/mo range, vs. closer to $60/mo for the "Bronze" HD pkg (24 HD ch's if I recall correctly) (+/- $5/mo on those prices... stil nets $20-$30/mo difference.. and you are getting >5 more HD channels as well)

It is also nice (IMO) that the Sat companies do not force you to pick up all the "filler channel" tiers before allowing you to add their HD tier (last I checked).

Mike

This is the point in the debate where the TWC fans generally clam up rather than conceding the point. By my count, no matter how much you pay TWC has at most ~19 HD channels (assuming you even count "Movies On Demand HD" as a channel), and this puts you in the $90/mo range, vs. closer to $60/mo for the "Bronze" HD pkg (24 HD ch's if I recall correctly) (+/- $5/mo on those prices... stil nets $20-$30/mo difference.. and you are getting >5 more HD channels as well)

It is also nice (IMO) that the Sat companies do not force you to pick up all the "filler channel" tiers before allowing you to add their HD tier (last I checked).

Mike

Actually I have the Silver package (for Fox Sports South) and no extra Movie channels. I came up with 29 by adding my my OTA HDs including WB which TWC doesn't have. I didn't add all the HD PPV channels or NFL-HD.

And the quality is better on SD and exactly the same on HD, for those keeping score. :)

If anyone out there still has their head in the sand, and wonders why TWC is not adding any decent programming ... here's why:

http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/437843.html

Their (Time Warner corporate) business model is to take the enormous profits from certain business units (ex. TWC) and funnel it to struggling business units (ex. AOL). As a result, we (as TWC subscribers) suffer with a below average programming line-up (with no significant additions in over 2 years), while they count our money and divert it other parts of their empire.

NBC17ENG ,

Using OTA ATSC tuner:

The sparkles are in the picture as well as the Side bars. I saw them this morning on the morning news at 7 am.

I also saw them on the commercials although on one commercial I sware I did not see them.

The audio crackel is still there when going from the show to a commercial but we discussed that back during the Olympics.

Yes, Kelsey looks no older than his Frasier show.

BTW- how does the Neilson Encoder count who is watching what show?

-DonB2

If anyone out there still has their head in the sand, and wonders why TWC is not adding any decent programming ... here's why:

http://www.newsobserver.com/104/story/437843.html

Their (Time Warner corporate) business model is to take the enormous profits from certain business units (ex. TWC) and funnel it to struggling business units (ex. AOL). As a result, we (as TWC subscribers) suffer with a below average programming line-up (with no significant additions in over 2 years), while they count our money and divert it other parts of their empire.
Charge as much as possible while spending as little as possible on programming; good for shareholders, not so good for subscribers. As long as their trend lines vis-a-vis SAT remain favorable, they will follow their present buisness model. This is the strategy of a mature industry. No vigor, no excitement. And effectively, they have reached saturation. No more growth through adding subscribers. From here on revenue growth will be necessarily based on selling subscribers more extras. VOD, gaming (FPS, strategy, RPG), etc. They've reached the point of diminishing returns on adding free content. Cable subscribers who want more (desirable) channels can only hope that SAT makes more inroads into cable's marketshare, or better yet, telcos make significant progress in providing video services. "A body at rest tends to stay at rest, unless acted on by an outside force." Only if SAT or TEL upset the status quo will cable change . . for the better . . for subscribers.

Just my $.02.

Charge as much as possible while spending as little as possible on programming; good for shareholders, not so good for subscribers. As long as their trend lines vis-a-vis SAT remain favorable, they will follow their present buisness model. This is the strategy of a mature industry. No vigor, no excitement. And effectively, they have reached saturation. No more growth through adding subscribers. From here on revenue growth will be necessarily based on selling subscribers more extras. VOD, gaming (FPS, strategy, RPG), etc. They've reached the point of diminishing returns on adding free content. Cable subscribers who want more (desirable) channels can only hope that SAT makes more inroads into cable's marketshare, or better yet, telcos make significant progress in providing video services. "A body at rest tends to stay at rest, unless acted on by an outside force." Only if SAT or TEL upset the status quo will cable change . . for the better . . for subscribers.

Just my $.02.
Very well said.

Posg (or any other DISH hater :rolleyes: ),
I now have 29 HD channels. How many do you have? :(

Your counting worthless Voom channels that show the same thing every 15 minutes. Take away all the voom crap and your number is much lower.

PS. I dont care if you have 100 HD channels. My 18 HD channels are all much better in PQ so there! :p :D

Your counting worthless Voom channels that show the same thing every 15 minutes. Take away all the voom crap and your number is much lower.

PS. I dont care if you have 100 HD channels. My 18 HD channels are all much better in PQ so there! :p :D

That just sounded bitter.

Maybe you can point out the picture quality difference to me. You and Posg both are welcome to come check out my Picture Quality, just PM me.
I don't know what receiver you had, your signal strength, your cables etc. , but there are DISH forums here that bash DISH for some of the same stuff we bash TWC for like adding even more HD and software glitches. One thing I see over and over again is how great the Picture is compared to cable. Yea there is discussions of HD-Lite by the so called HD-Purest, but to everyone of those there are 50 post on new users moving from Cable that can't believe the difference.

So go on being a hater. Keep harping on the fact that all my channels aren't "5 Star" and ignore the fact that some of the channels I won't watch are the same TWC is carrying.

-------
I now have Caller-ID built in my receivers and a 16:9 guide that shows 3hours at a time. :cool:

Your counting worthless Voom channels that show the same thing every 15 minutes. Take away all the voom crap and your number is much lower.

Aye, but by that same argument so are many of yours... TNT = the Law & Order/NBA channel, Universal HD does the same for Knight Rider/Quantum Leap.

Similar arguments for PBS HD, Discovery HD, INHD, INHD2, etc

Trust me, I wish this wasn't the case.. I thkn we'd all be much more satisfied if the programming had more variety. Point being, this is pot calling the kettle black.

EDIT: so at this point its a matter of who has more sucky/repeating channels :) Your odds go up of finding some ago old series being repeated that at least you like :)

Mike

The cable versus satellite argument five years down the road:

Each will offer around 50 "linear" HD channels.

Satellite will cobble together some sort of a DVR/IPTV download based VOD system.

Cable will give subscribers instant access to thousands of HD programs in a real time streaming IPTV VOD solution.

The difference will be:
Satellite: 50 linear HD channels + 50 DVR stored HD programs = 100 program choices
Cable: 50 linear HD channels + 1000's of VOD HD programs = 1000's of program choices

The technology pendulum is swinging towards the "fat pipe" segmentable capabilties of cable and/or fiber. What's happening on the internet with ABC offering free ad-supported streaming video of Lost, Housewife, etc. is the tip of the iceberg.

Satellite is the hare. Cable is the tortise.

Any questions ???

The cable versus satellite argument five years down the road:

......

Any questions ???

Yes.. why shouldn't we all flee to the hare (sat) until the tortoise (cable) catches up? :)

After all I'm watching TV now, not 5 years from now.

Mike

Why does everybody picks on "Knight Rider" so much. It's at least as good as "Dukes of Hazzard".

Oh dear, I've probably offended someone. Wink, Wink, Wink.

If we are talking oldies then Give me Sky King. I miss Penny.

-DonB2

Why does everybody picks on "Knight Rider" so much. It's at least as good as "Dukes of Hazzard".

Oh dear, I've probably offended someone. Wink, Wink, Wink.


Man those two shows were my favorite growing up! :D Granted I was 5-10 years old. When Sci-Fi picked up Knight Rider a few years back I made myself watch every episode for nostalgia. I couldn't believe just how horrible the show was, since I had such fond memories of it as a kid.

Yes.. why shouldn't we all flee to the hare (sat) until the tortoise (cable) catches up? :)

After all I'm watching TV now, not 5 years from now.

Mike

Cable knows you'll be back. They have the long-term technology advantage. That's why they're not in a panic mode to add bulk simply to steal subscribers. That's why they don't do stupid deals with the likes of NFL.

Why do you think satellite wants service contracts? Satellite growth has peaked, their growth numbers are way down. Cable is now growing at a faster pace than satellite.

My money's on the tortise. ;)

Very well said.
Not being from anywhere near Raleigh, and among this tough crowd to boot, I need to speak well. :)

The cable versus satellite argument five years down the road:

Each will offer around 50 "linear" HD channels.

Satellite will cobble together some sort of a DVR/IPTV download based VOD system.

Cable will give subscribers instant access to thousands of HD programs in a real time streaming IPTV VOD solution.

The difference will be:
Satellite: 50 linear HD channels + 50 DVR stored HD programs = 100 program choices
Cable: 50 linear HD channels + 1000's of VOD HD programs = 1000's of program choices

The technology pendulum is swinging towards the "fat pipe" segmentable capabilties of cable and/or fiber. What's happening on the internet with ABC offering free ad-supported streaming video of Lost, Housewife, etc. is the tip of the iceberg.

Satellite is the hare. Cable is the tortise.

Any questions ???
Sorry, can't resist. Cable has the capability/bandwidth you describe, but they will only offer what you say when they are forced to by competitors. I have cable, I love cable for the PQ and the ease and elegance in getting signals to my displays, but I wish SAT and TEL success - great success - as that is the only way cable will pony up the "50 linear HD channels + 1000's of VOD HD programs = 1000's of program choices."

POSG,

I realise that this is a Raleigh forum and TWC may reign supreme in Raleigh but when you start speaking in cable generalities I am not as sure what you are saying is true.

Other parts of the country do not have TWC they have Comcast and other Digital Cable providers and there are places around the country where geographical boundaries dictate what brand cable someone gets and that choice may only be analog cable at present.

In these parts of the country SAT may still have a big advantage.

Also people who move a lot may just find SAT to be to their liking as they can take a familair friend with them.

Just my two cents.

-Donb2

Cable knows you'll be back. They have the long-term technology advantage. That's why they're not in a panic mode to add bulk simply to steal subscribers. That's why they don't do stupid deals with the likes of NFL.

Why do you think satellite wants service contracts? Satellite growth has peaked, their growth numbers are way down. Cable is now growing at a faster pace than satellite.

My money's on the tortise. ;)

Let me translate...

If you want alot more HD content now and commitment to adding HD channels as they become available go with SAT.
If you have a little extra money, buy Stock in TWC.

It sounds like a sure return on your investment. Because we see all the advancements TWC is making and SAT is sitting on 10 year old technology and not making any advancements. :rolleyes: There will be plenty of time to count your money during reruns of Night Rider.

POSG,

I realise that this is a Raleigh forum and TWC may reign supreme in Raleigh but when you start speaking in cable generalities I am not as sure what you are saying is true.

Other parts of the country do not have TWC they have Comcast and other Digital Cable providers and there are places around the country where geographical boundaries dictate what brand cable someone gets and that choice may only be analog cable at present.

In these parts of the country SAT may still have a big advantage.

Also people who move a lot may just find SAT to be to their liking as they can take a familair friend with them.

Just my two cents.

-Donb2

I was a DirecTV subscriber for many years. I even had Dish for awhile. At one time satellite was the better service, both from a PQ, channel line-up, and PPV perspective. In many parts of the country, I'd say that's still true.

The big competition over the next few years is in the "triple play" arena; TV, phone and internet from a single provider. Cable has stolen a significant amount of phone business from the telcos, and now they're ready to fight back. When the choice is between bundled services from TWC or AT&T, or traditional phone service and satellite, well the latter will be on the sidelines.

Let me translate...

If you want alot more HD content now and commitment to adding HD channels as they become available go with SAT.
If you have a little extra money, buy Stock in TWC.

It sounds like a sure return on your investment. Because we see all the advancements TWC is making and SAT is sitting on 10 year old technology and not making any advancements. :rolleyes: There will be plenty of time to count your money during reruns of Night Rider.

See, there you go again, bashing Knight Rider. ;) ;) ;) .

Several years ago, I took the Universal Studio tour in CA, and the guide on the tram said something to the effect "And if you look to your left, you'll see 'Kit' from the NBC series 'Knight Rider'". Poor Kit was up on blocks with no hood and surrounded with weeds growing four foot tall.

If we are talking oldies then Give me Sky King. I miss Penny.

-DonB2

And the plane's name was "Songbird". (And I didn't even have to look it up on the internet.)

I was a DirecTV subscriber for many years. I even had Dish for awhile. At one time satellite was the better service, both from a PQ, channel line-up, and PPV perspective. In many parts of the country, I'd say that's still true.

The big competition over the next few years is in the "triple play" arena; TV, phone and internet from a single provider. Cable has stolen a significant amount of phone business from the telcos, and now they're ready to fight back. When the choice is between bundled services from TWC or AT&T, or traditional phone service and satellite, well the latter will be on the sidelines.

Every time you defend TWC you bring up RoadRunner and their VOIP offering.
We are talking TV Channels here. Let's compare Apples to Apples.
I concede that many customers like fewer bills even if it is higher than what 3 would be. I have RR and will keep it (with Business Class discount from my employer - not the bundle). I also have SunRocket VOIP for $199 a year.
Yea I have 3 bills instead of 1, but I have more HD channels, better SD quality and a better VOIP (more Features 2 numbers free and great quality).

So if you want to save "Checks"; go with the TWC bundle.
If you want to save "Money"; go "a la carte" like me.

Not being from anywhere near Raleigh, and among this tough crowd to boot, I need to speak well. :)

How'd you happen to make this your "home away from home" anyway ???

Every time you defend TWC you bring up RoadRunner and their VOIP offering.
We are talking TV Channels here. Let's compare Apples to Apples.
I concede that many customers like fewer bills even if it is higher than what 3 would be. I have RR and will keep it (with Business Class discount from my employer - not the bundle). I also have SunRocket VOIP for $199 a year.
Yea I have 3 bills instead of 1, but I have more HD channels, better SD quality and a better VOIP (more Features 2 numbers free and great quality).

So if you want to save "Checks"; go with the TWC bundle.
If you want to save "Money"; go "a la carte" like me.

Because in the end, it's the "network", not the "content". ALL of this stuff, voice, video, and data is just a bunch of streams of routed digital packets. The guy with the most efficient network for manuvering all this data around will be the eventual winner.

Plus, the concept of "TV Channels", or as what we now call "linear" channels, is starting to lose importance. Access to programs, not channels, will be the future. And as mentioned earlier, it's already being rolled out. ABC knows it, CBS knows it, Apple knows it, even the satellite providers know it. And they are scrambling to try to figure out how to do it

You are in the right place for your current needs, but the target is constantly moving.

See, there you go again, bashing Knight Rider. ;) ;) ;) .

if I happened to be a fan of the series that TNT and UHD show over and over (and over and over), I'd be less unhappy (high levels of repetition would never qualify for actual happiness).. TNT/UHD just happened to pick material that I don't care for. In that regard 24 ch of repeating material is "better" (ie. less bad) than 18 ch of repeating material, b/c my odds go up of finding one set of repeats that I like.

In the end, there's still a dreadful lack of HD programming. :(

Mike

Charge as much as possible while spending as little as possible on programming; good for shareholders, not so good for subscribers. As long as their trend lines vis-a-vis SAT remain favorable, they will follow their present buisness model. This is the strategy of a mature industry. No vigor, no excitement. And effectively, they have reached saturation. No more growth through adding subscribers. From here on revenue growth will be necessarily based on selling subscribers more extras. VOD, gaming (FPS, strategy, RPG), etc. They've reached the point of diminishing returns on adding free content. Cable subscribers who want more (desirable) channels can only hope that SAT makes more inroads into cable's marketshare, or better yet, telcos make significant progress in providing video services. "A body at rest tends to stay at rest, unless acted on by an outside force." Only if SAT or TEL upset the status quo will cable change . . for the better . . for subscribers.

Just my $.02.

Sadly, you are right on the money (no pun intended), my man.

if I happened to be a fan of the series that TNT and UHD show over and over (and over and over), I'd be less unhappy (high levels of repetition would never qualify for actual happiness).. TNT/UHD just happened to pick material that I don't care for. In that regard 24 ch of repeating material is "better" (ie. less bad) than 18 ch of repeating material, b/c my odds go up of finding one set of repeats that I like.

In the end, there's still a dreadful lack of HD programming.

Mike

Short history lesson.

Color TV was introduced in 1954. Ten years later, CBS was still an all black & white network, save the annual showing of the "Wizard of OZ". Two years later, all primetime network TV was colorcast.

HD requires retooling the entire production and distribution chain.

Five years from now, all new production will be HD, news, sports, entertainment. Most of the major cable networks will have converted as well.

Remember that HD is still in less than 25% of the households. 30% is regarded as the "tipping point".

Because in the end, it's the "network", not the "content". ALL of this stuff, voice, video, and data is just a bunch of streams of routed digital packets. The guy with the most efficient network for manuvering all this data around will be the eventual winner.

Plus, the concept of "TV Channels", or as what we now call "linear" channels, is starting to lose importance. Access to programs, not channels, will be the future. And as mentioned earlier, it's already being rolled out. ABC knows it, CBS knows it, Apple knows it, even the satellite providers know it. And they are scrambling to try to figure out how to do it.

Aye, but now you are talking about what I was calling an alternate form of "a la carte" a few weeks ago. do we have a name for a per-program business model (other than iTunes) ?

While I do "surf" thru the channels I generally only am a loyal viewer of 3-4 non-broadcast series... as such all I really need is:

DVR (could even be my HTPC)
4 shows at $10/mo (max) via iTunes, and given that shows at most are "new" 50% of the year, that is $20/mo avg.

So with the current models, I pay $60/mo for access to these shows, plus the ability to surf. But if I am willing to give that up, I could still watch most of what I watch for much less (on average).

The parts of this model I find curious are how would new shows convince people to "buy" them? would the pilot episode be free as a loss-leader? Would season one be cheaper than season 2? etc.

But I agree, at some point I think this model will be much more the mainstream.

In theory I can already approach this with iTunes (tho I do not believe the shows are in HD), but would need to construct an OTA HD DVR (since TWC would not let me rent the 8300HD with just basic) so that I would not have to "buy" the shows that are "free" OTA anyway. All the "non-broadcast" shows I watch are already sold via iTunes. Perhaps the tortoise is already out-foxed? :) All I really need from TWC is the pipe. And in general I think TWC does a good job with that (tho prices in this area seem 20-40% higher than in other areas with more competeition for broadband.

Mike

Because in the end, it's the "network", not the "content". ALL of this stuff, voice, video, and data is just a bunch of streams of routed digital packets. The guy with the most efficient network for manuvering all this data around will be the eventual winner.

Plus, the concept of "TV Channels", or as what we now call "linear" channels, is starting to lose importance. Access to programs, not channels, will be the future. And as mentioned earlier, it's already being rolled out. ABC knows it, CBS knows it, Apple knows it, even the satellite providers know it. And they are scrambling to try to figure out how to do it

You are in the right place for your current needs, but the target is constantly moving.

Sorry, you are wrong.
I would venture to say everyone on this forum but "You" would say it is about the content. That is, we all want a high quantity of high quality channels. You are the only one obsessed with how we get them.
There is nothing wrong with being concerned about future technologies and not wanting to by a product that will be obsolete in 6 months. But let's have the debate in the "Present" not the "Future". You don't know what will happen in 5 years. I would think Charlie Ergen wants to keep making lots of money so he won't sit on his current technology as long as Ted Turner sat on his.
If you want to debate current distribution technologies and curent channel offerings, great; SAT wins. If you want to debate what may or may not be here in 2011 ; TWC may win, SAT may win.
I'll meet you back here in 5 years so one of us can say "I told you so". But until then you keep watching Night Rider and I'll watch my other 28 HD channels (could be more, but I'm cheap). :)

------------
We'll have to start collecting from U-HD for all the free Knight Rider advertising. :)

Sorry, you are wrong.
I would venture to say everyone on this forum but "You" would say it is about the content. That is, we all want a high quantity of high quality channels. You are the only one obsessed with how we get them.
There is nothing wrong with being concerned about future technologies and not wanting to by a product that will be obsolete in 6 months. But let's have the debate in the "Present" not the "Future". You don't know what will happen in 5 years. I would think Charlie Ergen wants to keep making lots of money so he won't sit on his current technology as long as Ted Turner sat on his.
If you want to debate current distribution technologies and curent channel offerings, great; SAT wins. If you want to debate what may or may not be here in 2011 ; TWC may win, SAT may win.
I'll meet you back here in 5 years so one of us can say "I told you so". But until then you keep watching Night Rider and I'll watch my other 28 HD channels (could be more, but I'm cheap). :)

------------
We'll have to start collecting from U-HD for all the free Knight Rider advertising. :)

Jeez, I'm pooped. I think I'll just go home and watch "Knight Rider" and "Lost" and not worry about all this stuff. ;)

Jeez, I'm pooped. I think I'll just go home and watch "Knight Rider" and "Lost" and not worry about all this stuff. ;)

As my 4yr old daughter would say, "I am the winner and you are the loser". :)

I'll go ahead and schedule an "I told you so" post for 2011.

Posg,

Kit is up on blocks !!! That is sad. I remember seeing the Kit exhibit when it was first added to Universal in California.

Can't validate the plane's name in Sky King without googling.

Do you also remember what night of the week Sky King was on without looking it up?

So POSG , what is your take on some corporate raider type coming in and buying a controlling interest in TWC and than selling it off as parts?

-DonB2

DVR (could even be my HTPC)
<....>
The parts of this model I find curious are how would new shows convince people to "buy" them? would the pilot episode be free as a loss-leader? Would season one be cheaper than season 2? etc.

Mike

What you describe is essentially what I do. I have a home-built HD DVR running MythTV as my "media center". For non-current OTA shows, I buy/rent the DVDs or record reruns OTA. I generally rely on the recommendation of friends before buying something. I've gotten into shows like The West Wing and FireFly this way.

Drew

As my 4yr old daughter would say, "I am the winner and you are the loser". :)

I'll go ahead and schedule an "I told you so" post for 2011.

You just exposed yourself.

The reason you are so determined to defeat me is to regain your self esteem after being beat by a four year old !!!!

Just kidding !!!! Enjoy !!! :) :) :)

Posg,

Kit is up on blocks !!! That is sad. I remember seeing the Kit exhibit when it was first added to Universal in California.

Can't validate the plane's name in Sky King without googling.

Do you also remember what night of the week Sky King was on without looking it up?

So POSG , what is your take on some corporate raider type coming in and buying a controlling interest in TWC and than selling it off as parts?

-DonB2

I only remember Sky King on CBS Saturday Morning kids block. My sister and I fought over watching Sky King or "Fury" (a horse opera) on NBC.

As far as TWC, they dodged a recent attempt, but there is no stability in coorperate ownship, anything could happen at any time.

" only remember Sky King on CBS Saturday Morning kids block. My sister and I fought over watching Sky King or "Fury" (a horse drama) on NBC."


POSG,

It was a trick question and you passed.

CBS (Channel 12 ) in my town was the best reception for us and was VHF.

The TV we had at the time only received VHF channels and the other network was UHF so I guess I did not have the conflict over Fury although I do remember the show.

Don't take me wrong about the corporate raider question as I am not a fan of such things seeing too many little guys/gals get hurt during and after them.

-DonB2

ESPN2HD Schedule:

Wednesday May 10, 2006
Nothing

Thursday May 11, 2006
1:00-1:30 AM Fastbreak **
1:30-2:00 AM Timeless **
7:30-8:00 PM NFL Live **

Friday May 12, 2006
Nothing

** Rerun of a show seen on ESPN.

How can you live without it ?????

NBC 17 no longer sparkles. The logo inserter was causing the memory leak. It is also ahead of the Nielson encoder, so it likely caused it to freak out.

The Nielson encoder actually just encodes station ID data, date and time in the signal. Their metered households also record this data, and they compare the two to confirm meter box "A" was indeed watching station "X" at the time and date it records. Then they throw that data out, as a duck walks across the program schedules for all stations in the market. When the duck says Aflac!, it is declared the winner of the time period. If the duck does not like the program on a station, well, use your imagination....

ESPN2HD Schedule:
<....>
How can you live without it ?????

Sure.. Now. But during basketball season, it seemed like every game I watched in SD on ESPN2 had the ESPN2HD logo slapped all over it, making me envious. If TWC has ESPN2HD next fall, I'll probably sign up for the "full-blown, bend-over-grab-the-soap, you have to take all these unwanted bundled channels just to get it" package that includes ESPN2HD (which is what I hate about cable). And then I'll drop it again in April (which is what I *love* about cable).

Drew

ESPN2HD Schedule:

Wednesday May 10, 2006
Nothing

Thursday May 11, 2006
1:00-1:30 AM Fastbreak **
1:30-2:00 AM Timeless **
7:30-8:00 PM NFL Live **

Friday May 12, 2006
Nothing

** Rerun of a show seen on ESPN.

How can you live without it ?????

If ESPN2HD is so worthless, why do TWC execs say that they are desperately trying to get it for us (but it's the mean old ogors at Disney that won't let them have it)?

Either they feel the same way you do and have no intention of getting it (which is what I suspect), or they really do think it's a worthwhile addition. If it's the former, they are lying bastards. If it's the later, then your argument is specious (look it up).

What is your problem with sports programming? I know, I know ... you think it artifically drives up sub rates for all. But, the fact is that sports is very high demand, and MSOs realize that so they deliver it for their customers ... except for TWC. TWC was the last to add ESPNHD and will be the last (if ever) to get ESPN2HD and the NFL Network (SD/HD). You and others site TWC being as good or better vs. other cable providers/sat for HD. I've done the research- while Comcast may lack HDNet or InHD (I can't recall whether it's one or both), they have everything else that TWC has and they do not charge for an HD tier. Most, if not all, of the other major players have either ESPN2HD/NFL Network (SD/HD), ESPNU, etc.

The people that respond to your sarcastic remarks about ESPN2HD are sports lovers, like me- who are sick of seeing other services (yes, the Internet is good for something) pick up the programming that TWC refuses to add. Most are like me-- they don't want to make a jump to satellite because of the expense of equipment and/or the hassle of OTA antennas (ex. when local HD becomes available via D*, etc.). So, we hold out believing the garbage that TWC tells us ("we should have ESPN2HD in time for MLB opening day" ... F. Dressler). I guess we will soon have a decision to make.

As for non-sports HD content, we are not getting any of that either. And, yes, CONTENT IS the issue. The bundled network model is nice, yes, but this is a forum on HDTV ... not HDTV, high-speed Internet and digital phone service.

If ESPN2HD is so worthless, why do TWC execs say that they are desperately trying to get it for us (but it's the mean old ogors at Disney that won't let them have it)?

Either they feel the same way you do and have no intention of getting it (which is what I suspect), or they really do think it's a worthwhile addition. If it's the former, they are lying bastards. If it's the later, then your argument is specious (look it up).

What is your problem with sports programming? I know, I know ... you think it artifically drives up sub rates for all. But, the fact is that sports is very high demand, and MSOs realize that so they deliver it for their customers ... except for TWC. TWC was the last to add ESPNHD and will be the last (if ever) to get ESPN2HD and the NFL Network (SD/HD). You and others site TWC being as good or better vs. other cable providers/sat for HD. I've done the research- while Comcast may lack HDNet or InHD (I can't recall whether it's one or both), they have everything else that TWC has and they do not charge for an HD tier. Most, if not all, of the other major players have either ESPN2HD/NFL Network (SD/HD), ESPNU, etc.

The people that respond to your sarcastic remarks about ESPN2HD are sports lovers, like me- who are sick of seeing other services (yes, the Internet is good for something) pick up the programming that TWC refuses to add. Most are like me-- they don't want to make a jump to satellite because of the expense of equipment and/or the hassle of OTA antennas (ex. when local HD becomes available via D*, etc.). So, we hold out believing the garbage that TWC tells us ("we should have ESPN2HD in time for MLB opening day" ... F. Dressler). I guess we will soon have a decision to make.

As for non-sports HD content, we are not getting any of that either. And, yes, CONTENT IS the issue. The bundled network model is nice, yes, but this is a forum on HDTV ... not HDTV, high-speed Internet and digital phone service.

Carrying ESPN2HD is just a small piece of a negotiation puzzle that includes carriage of ABC O&O stations (including WTVD), the Disney Channel(s), ABC Family, all the ESPN's, and more. This includes how much they cost, what service level they're assigned to, how long the terms are intact, and often other "future" considerations.

Again, all I'm trying to present here is the real world business realities of how these things work. Is ESPN2HD a front burner issue for Time Warner? Hell no. Will they lose subscribers if they don't carry it. Very few. Will they save money if they don't. Maybe a whole lot.

There are many many many issues on the table between TWC and Disney. ESPN2HD is a minor pawn in the game.

As far as demand for sports programming, the flagship ESPN is viewed in less than 10% of the households where it is available. ESPN2 reaches considerably less.

Carrying ESPN2HD is just a small piece of a negotiation puzzle that includes carriage of ABC O&O stations (including WTVD), the Disney Channel(s), ABC Family, all the ESPN's, and more. This includes how much they cost, what service level they're assigned to, how long the terms are intact, and often other "future" considerations.

Again, all I'm trying to present here is the real world business realities of how these things work. Is ESPN2HD a front burner issue for Time Warner? Hell no. Will they lose subscribers if they don't carry it. Very few. Will they save money if they don't. Maybe a whole lot.

There are many many many issues on the table between TWC and Disney. ESPN2HD is a minor pawn in the game.

As far as demand for sports programming, the flagship ESPN is viewed in less than 10% of the households where it is available. ESPN2 reaches considerably less.

Dressler has never indicated in any correspondence that I've seen that carriage of ESPN2HD is part of a larger deal with ABC/Disney. His comments are always in the context of ESPN2HD only. If the deal is hanging on other channel agreements (ABC Family, local ABC affiliates, etc.), as you mentioned-- then I would have expected him to say so. It's a much more palatable excuse than the one given-- namely, that ABC/Disney is "obligated" to give up ESPN2HD. It leaves us to assume that TWC is expecting ABC/Disney to allow TWC carriage of ESPN2HD for either free or at a under-valued cost/sub.

If it's not front-burner, it should be ... based upon the demand that I see from this and other forums. The percentages that you cite may be true, but I would bet that ESPNHD is by far the most viewed part of TWCs HD tier. The other HD channels included (InHD, InHD2, HDNet, HDNet movies, Universal HD) are OK, but if ESPNHD were not included, how many subs do you believe would buy it at $6.95/mo? That's why ESPN2HD is important. It's not the total number of hours of HD programming that it and ESPNHD show. It's the events (college hoops, college football, MLB, and more to come) that we miss because of TWC stubborn contract process. If they really cared about what we want, we'd already have Movie Channel HD (supposedly the deal is "done"), National Geographic HD, and on and on and on. They can't use the infrastructure excuse, since it's up to local TWC to decide if their respective facilities can handle the bandwidth requirements.

Face it-- while TWC does seem to at least keep pace technologically, they are woeful in their approach to content delivery/carriage agreements vs. customer demand.

[QUOTE=toadfannc]Dressler has never indicated in any correspondence that I've seen that carriage of ESPN2HD is part of a larger deal with ABC/Disney. His comments are always in the context of ESPN2HD only. If the deal is hanging on other channel agreements (ABC Family, local ABC affiliates, etc.), as you mentioned-- then I would have expected him to say so.

Heads of companies are not inclined to air dirty laundry and reveal corporate infighting to the population at large. In most cases it's not particularly endearing and often TMI.


[QUOTE=toadfannc]If it's not front-burner, it should be ... based upon the demand that I see from this and other forums.

Assessing publc opinion from posts on specialized internet forums is like asking a fan at Fenway if the Yankees are any good this year. It's a big world.

Dressler has never indicated in any correspondence that I've seen that carriage of ESPN2HD is part of a larger deal with ABC/Disney. His comments are always in the context of ESPN2HD only. If the deal is hanging on other channel agreements (ABC Family, local ABC affiliates, etc.), as you mentioned-- then I would have expected him to say so. It's a much more palatable excuse than the one given-- namely, that ABC/Disney is "obligated" to give up ESPN2HD. It leaves us to assume that TWC is expecting ABC/Disney to allow TWC carriage of ESPN2HD for either free or at a under-valued cost/sub.

If it's not front-burner, it should be ... based upon the demand that I see from this and other forums. The percentages that you cite may be true, but I would bet that ESPNHD is by far the most viewed part of TWCs HD tier. The other HD channels included (InHD, InHD2, HDNet, HDNet movies, Universal HD) are OK, but if ESPNHD were not included, how many subs do you believe would buy it at $6.95/mo? That's why ESPN2HD is important. It's not the total number of hours of HD programming that it and ESPNHD show. It's the events (college hoops, college football, MLB, and more to come) that we miss because of TWC stubborn contract process. If they really cared about what we want, we'd already have Movie Channel HD (supposedly the deal is "done"), National Geographic HD, and on and on and on. They can't use the infrastructure excuse, since it's up to local TWC to decide if their respective facilities can handle the bandwidth requirements.

Face it-- while TWC does seem to at least keep pace technologically, they are woeful in their approach to content delivery/carriage agreements vs. customer demand.

These guys always hold their cards tight when making these deals, and once done, you'll never know who won. I can pretty much guarantee you there is more on the table than ESPN2HD.

For example, ABC/Disney also owns "Soapnet". My guess is that you probably couldn't give a crap about it. Many systems carry Soapnet on a digital tier. Some not at all. ABC wants it moved to basic. TWC wants ESPN2HD. You want, they want. Contract revision time. All these issues are reopened.

Since satellite operators have to compete against local cable systems that collectively offer pretty much everything under the sun, so must they. Strategically, Disney, et al, negotiate with the satellite guys FIRST, then they're in a much better negotiating position with the cable guys, and they exploit it.

So here's the long and short of it. Fewer than 10% of TWC's subscribers take the HD tier. A good chuck of those don't care about sports. Would you add new subscribers to the HD tier by adding ESPN2HD now. Probably not.
Is there much at risk here? No.

Would it be smart to maybe add three or four HD channels to the HD tier, and simultaneously jack the rates up? YES. That means completing multiple contracts with multiple parties.

NBC 17 no longer sparkles. The logo inserter was causing the memory leak. It is also ahead of the Nielson encoder, so it likely caused it to freak out.

The Nielson encoder actually just encodes station ID data, date and time in the signal. Their metered households also record this data, and they compare the two to confirm meter box "A" was indeed watching station "X" at the time and date it records. Then they throw that data out, as a duck walks across the program schedules for all stations in the market. When the duck says Aflac!, it is declared the winner of the time period. If the duck does not like the program on a station, well, use your imagination....

I take it the AFLAC duck has an issue with the NBC peacock. Perhaps a romance gone sour ????

Sorry, couldn't resist. ;) ;) ;)

[QUOTE=toadfannc]Assessing public opinion from posts on specialized internet forums is like asking a fan at Fenway if the Yankees are any good this year. It's a big world.

A much needed reality check. Thanks. ;) ;) ;)

How'd you happen to make this your "home away from home" anyway ???
Ha ha! Fair question. I have a Passport/8300HD and somehow learned that Raleigh/Durham TWC'ers got a Passport rev that mentioned SATA in the DIAG. Knowing the hoopla that would cause, I thought I'd lurk and see if anyone really got it to work. Of course, you've read my posts so you know I'm not one to just lurk. :D

Five years from now, all new production will be HD, news, sports, entertainment. Most of the major cable networks will have converted as well.
You seem hopelessly stuck in the future. :)

You seem hopelessly stuck in the future. :)

"I like the future. I'm in it." Firesign Theatre ;) ;)

Assessing publc opinion from posts on specialized internet forums is like asking a fan at Fenway if the Yankees are any good this year. It's a big world.
GREAT post! But those of us with our color scheme set to AVS White had to use our secret decoder rings to read it. :)

"I like the future. I'm in it." Firesign Theatre ;) ;)
Yea, we should get together for some synthahol. :)

Yea, we should get together for some synthahol. :)

Yeah, but....

"Your here, and their there" or "How can you be two places at once if you're not anywhere at all?"

If you weren't in college in the late sixties, early seventies, you might not get it. I hope Pepar does. ;) ;) ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baler
[QUOTE=toadfannc]Assessing public opinion from posts on specialized internet forums is like asking a fan at Fenway if the Yankees are any good this year. It's a big world.


A much needed reality check. Thanks.

So True, This group is beyond three standard deviations from the mean or as some would say, the lunatic fringe. ;)

NBC 17 no longer sparkles. The logo inserter was causing the memory leak. It is also ahead of the Nielson encoder, so it likely caused it to freak out.

Thank you! Law and Order looked magnificent last night. It sounds like you have a good excuse to disable those pesky logos :)

Drew

NBC 17 no longer sparkles. The logo inserter was causing the memory leak. It is also ahead of the Nielson encoder, so it likely caused it to freak out.
Thx, much appreciated. Sorry it took so long for me to reply with a thank you. I had to weed through all the ongoing cable vs. sat verbalizations posts that is really personal choice that won't change per individual taste no matter whats said unless something in their chosen service pisses them off enough to do so. ;)

Yeah, but....

"Your here, and their there" or "How can you be two places at once if you're not anywhere at all?"

If you weren't in college in the late sixties, early seventies, you might not get it. I hope Pepar does. ;) ;) ;)
Regnad Kcin certainly does. ;)

Regnad Kcin certainly does. ;)

We'd better put a stop to this right now !!! But, oh, were those the days !!!!

Thx, much appreciated. Sorry it took so long for me to reply with a thank you. I had to weed through all the ongoing cable vs. sat verbalizations posts that is really personal choice that won't change per individual taste no matter whats said unless something in their chosen service pisses them off enough to do so. ;)

I'd like to thing there was some meat in the sandwich somewhere. Discussions of Quantity and Quality are not mere "individual taste".
But you are right, there are some that definitely have a horse in the race and if someone comes to town offering 100 HD channels for a $20 spot, they would find something wrong with it.

And if someone finds such a deal, I want them to post even if it offends the TWC Gladiators. :)

Hehe, I was j/k around. :)

I'd like to thing there was some meat in the sandwich somewhere. Discussions of Quantity and Quality are not mere "individual taste".
But you are right, there are some that definitely have a horse in the race and if someone comes to town offering 100 HD channels for a $20 spot, they would find something wrong with it.

And if someone finds such a deal, I want them to post even if it offends the TWC Gladiators. :)

If someone offered 100 HD channels for $20/month, I'd definitely find something wrong with it. ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

NFL Network is already putting pressure on Dish Network to put it on a lower lever tier.

Between ESPN, retransmission cash payments for network broadcast channels, and now NFL network, the NFL is probably gets 10% of my monthly cable payment.

If there were ever an argument for a la carte, subsidizing sport leagues is it.

And if the NFL Network is an "advertising bonanza raking in the money", why do they need to raise their carriage fees 125% ???
I know I'm grasping at straws, but a friend of mine just gave me a thought: Maybe the NFL doesn't really want TWC to pick up their new network. It's very likely that if TWC doesn't carry the network it will offend at least a small number of disgruntled cable subscribers who are also NFL fans enough that it pushes them to satellite ...

I'm an NFL fan. I know if I had cable (which I don't) and I was pondering where to go to get my NFL Network fix (which I'm not), then I would very seriously consider signing up with DirecTV and then doing all the dishes for the rest of the summer so my wife would let me add NFL Sunday Ticket to our subscription plan.

... just a thought.

I know I'm grasping at straws, but a friend of mine just gave me a thought: Maybe the NFL doesn't really want TWC to pick up their new network. It's very likely that if TWC doesn't carry the network it will offend at least a small number of disgruntled cable subscribers who are also NFL fans enough that it pushes them to satellite ...

I'm an NFL fan. I know if I had cable (which I don't) and I was pondering where to go to get my NFL Network fix (which I'm not), then I would very seriously consider signing up with DirecTV and then doing all the dishes for the rest of the summer so my wife would let me add NFL Sunday Ticket to our subscription plan.

... just a thought.

Once the Adelphia deal is done, TWC and Comcast combined will serve nearly 40,000,000 households, while DirecTV and Dish combined serve 25,000,000. Would not be a smart business strategy to alienate the cable guys. NFL Network wants (should I say NEEDS) TWC (and the rest of Comcast) badly. Go to the NFL website. It tells people to call TWC and demand NFL Network, not to switch to satellite.

Go to the NFL website. It tells people to call TWC and demand NFL Network, not to switch to satellite.

Maybe people should call them and remind them that they are advertiser supported, and tell them to drop their carriage fees :)

Drew

Once the Adelphia deal is done, TWC and Comcast combined will serve nearly 40,000,000 households, while DirecTV and Dish combined serve 25,000,000. Would not be a smart business strategy to alienate the cable guys. NFL Network wants (should I say NEEDS) TWC (and the rest of Comcast) badly. Go to the NFL website. It tells people to call TWC and demand NFL Network, not to switch to satellite.
Like I said ... it was "just a thought" ... I mean I can't claim to have my finger on the pulse of the industry ... quite the contrary, actually. I'm just grabbing at straws and thinking out loud.

Regardless, the NFL stands to gain a great deal if TWC jumps onboard, as you point out. But if they don't, I would suggest they might still gain from new Sunday Ticket subscribers.

btw - I did go to the NFL.com website, but nothing related to TWC was readily apparent on the front page. Do you have a link? Thanks.

Maybe people should call them and remind them that they are advertiser supported, and tell them to drop their carriage fees :)

Drew
The NFL has done a brilliant job marketing their product over the past decade. The drawback now (for NFL fans, that is) is that if these business models change the future may bring less opportunity to watch football in this league w/o some type of subscription. Whether it's Sunday Ticket, or all games on cable/sat, or some other type of pay per view model ... and if that day comes, I'll be one of the first to bail out when my bunny ears no longer tune in pigskin on Sunday afternoon.

More problems NBC17ENG.

Didnt have any video problems tonight but there was a problem just as distracting.

Severe crackling and popping comming from the Right Channel Audio. I double checked on my other speaker system and got the same thing.

Like I said ... it was "just a thought" ... I mean I can't claim to have my finger on the pulse of the industry ... quite the contrary, actually. I'm just grabbing at straws and thinking out loud.

Regardless, the NFL stands to gain a great deal if TWC jumps onboard, as you point out. But if they don't, I would suggest they might still gain from new Sunday Ticket subscribers.

btw - I did go to the NFL.com website, but nothing related to TWC was readily apparent on the front page. Do you have a link? Thanks.

Here's the link:

http://nfl.viewerlink.tv/

Notice these are mostly markets with teams.

The NFL has done a brilliant job marketing their product over the past decade. The drawback now (for NFL fans, that is) is that if these business models change the future may bring less opportunity to watch football in this league w/o some type of subscription. Whether it's Sunday Ticket, or all games on cable/sat, or some other type of pay per view model ... and if that day comes, I'll be one of the first to bail out when my bunny ears no longer tune in pigskin on Sunday afternoon.

I think you hit the nail on the head. The NFL has moved far away from being about athletic competition. It's moved to the arena of celebrity based pop culture.

Can "American Idol - NFL Edition" or "Dancing with the Linemen" be far behind, either on FOX or the NFL Network ????? What about "NFL Jeopardy" with John Madden??? "Extreme Makeover - Dallas Cowboys"??? (DUCK)

Two new On Demand channels on TWC:

1100 - Driver TV - 2 minute factoids about a variety of current models, actually kinda useful.
1104 - Movie Trailers - No explanation needed.

Not that these are gonna sway any satellite subscribers, but it's just another small step towards true interactivity.

The NFL has done a brilliant job marketing their product over the past decade. The drawback now (for NFL fans, that is) is that if these business models change the future may bring less opportunity to watch football in this league w/o some type of subscription. Whether it's Sunday Ticket, or all games on cable/sat, or some other type of pay per view model ... and if that day comes, I'll be one of the first to bail out when my bunny ears no longer tune in pigskin on Sunday afternoon.

I still can't believe that carriage fees or subscription fees would bring the NFL more revenue than Ads. With some sports maybe, but people actually watch the NFL (and Live to boot). So barring the trip to the fridge we actually are watching the commercials.
But I have the NFL Network so that's 8 more games I don't have to worry about. :)

I still can't believe that carriage fees or subscription fees would bring the NFL more revenue than Ads. With some sports maybe, but people actually watch the NFL (and Live to boot). So barring the trip to the fridge we actually are watching the commercials.
But I have the NFL Network so that's 8 more games I don't have to worry about. :)

Not "instead of" revenue, "in addition to" revenue. With "faux" digital ad logos already being "painted" onto the field, how long before an NFL Jersey looks like a NASCAR uniform? It's all about incremental revenue. Everytime an NFL player walks on the field, he earns more than you or I will earn in a lifetime. Somebody's gotta pay the bill.

Two new On Demand channels on TWC:

1100 - Driver TV - 2 minute factoids about a variety of current models, actually kinda useful.
1104 - Movie Trailers - No explanation needed.

Not that these are gonna sway any satellite subscribers, but it's just another small step towards true interactivity.

Dooohh... I left to soon. :rolleyes:
Seriously, until TWC updates the VOD to have the response time of a DVR and no more "Try again later" messages, it is just to frustrating to use.
When I first got TWC I dove right in to the "Forensic Files" and other programing I like on VOD, but I soon realized how setting a DVR timer is more convenient overall.

Not "instead of" revenue, "in addition to" revenue. With "faux" digital ad logos already being "painted" onto the field, how long before an NFL Jersey looks like a NASCAR uniform? It's all about incremental revenue. Everytime an NFL player walks on the field, he earns more than you or I will earn in a lifetime. Somebody's gotta pay the bill.

Oh, I agree. The uniforms will look like nascar and the stands like a the outfield wall in baseball. And right now, Sunday Ticket shows games with commercials. But I think that is just because they are also being aired in the local market. The original comment was that when the stop being aired in the local market, that's when we will walk. I agree with that. If they go purely subscription based and with commercials they deserve "Arena Football" or facsimile to take their throne.

Oh, I agree. The uniforms will look like nascar and the stands like a the outfield wall in baseball. And right now, Sunday Ticket shows games with commercials. But I think that is just because they are also being aired in the local market. The original comment was that when the stop being aired in the local market, that's when we will walk. I agree with that. If they go purely subscription based and with commercials they deserve "Arena Football" or facsimile to take their throne.

SHOCKING DEVELOPMENT !!!!

"dslate69" and "posg" AGREE on something.

Stay tuned ;) ;) ;) ;)

SHOCKING DEVELOPMENT !!!!

"dslate69" and "posg" AGREE on something.

Stay tuned ;) ;) ;) ;)

Is it too late to take it back ? :)

Is it too late to take it back ? :)

Too late !!!

Two new On Demand channels on TWC:

1100 - Driver TV - 2 minute factoids about a variety of current models, actually kinda useful.
1104 - Movie Trailers - No explanation needed.

Not that these are gonna sway any satellite subscribers, but it's just another small step towards true interactivity.
oh, whoppy doo!! i will rush to my tv right now and check those bad boys out. :D LOL.

Oh, I agree. The uniforms will look like nascar and the stands like a the outfield wall in baseball.
Anybody see players getting bigger, even the WR's? Bigger players=Bigger uniforms=More ad/logo space! ;)

Anybody see players getting bigger, even the WR's? Bigger players=Bigger uniforms=More ad/logo space! ;)

Maybe rather than naming teams after cities, they can rename them after sponsors, like they've done with the stadiums.

Coca-Cola Cowboys has a nice ring to it. Then when they move cities, they won't have to rename the team. Just when the sponsership expires. How about the Dodge Colts???

Hard to believe so many people take this stuff SOOOO seriously.

oh, whoppy doo!! i will rush to my tv right now and check those bad boys out. :D LOL.

Just one point higher on the excitement scale than another "religious" tax shelter, er, um, I mean channel. :rolleyes:

Maybe rather than naming teams after cities, they can rename them after sponsors, like they've done with the stadiums.

Coca-Cola Cowboys has a nice ring to it. Then when they move cities, they won't have to rename the team. Just when the sponsership expires. How about the Dodge Colts???

Hard to believe so many people take this stuff SOOOO seriously.

Better yet I would change my last name to Coca-Cola, for the right price. If a high profile player hasn't done it yet, they will. A company would pay top dollar for that prime Real Estate on the jersey.

Maybe rather than naming teams after cities, they can rename them after sponsors, like they've done with the stadiums.

Coca-Cola Cowboys has a nice ring to it. Then when they move cities, they won't have to rename the team. Just when the sponsership expires. How about the Dodge Colts???
IN the 80's, the Coca Cowboys would have been apt. ;)

IN the 80's, the Coca Cowboys would have been apt. ;)

Touche !!!

Better yet I would change my last name to Coca-Cola, for the right price. If a high profile player hasn't done it yet, they will. A company would pay top dollar for that prime Real Estate on the jersey.

True Story: A town it Texas recently changed it's name to "Dish, TX" in a promotional stunt by "you-know-who".

A couple of statements from Fred Dressler pulled from another string regarding ESPN2HD. Dressler is TWC's corporate programming executive.

"Espn is withholding this service from us until we agree to pay them for some things that are totally unrelated."

"We are entitled to the espn2hd feed now and want to give it to you at no
additional cost. Short of suing disney/espn, which would take years, we
are trying to negotiate to get it on. Disney is demanding lots of
additional things that will cost you even more money (that's why you
think time warner is screwing you) when all we want is for espn to
delivery what they are already obligated to do."

So who's really the bad guy, the "Wabbit" or the "Mouse" ???

So who's really the bad guy, the "Wabbit" or the "Mouse" ???
I'm sure they're taking turns.

I didn't realize there's a $20/month upcharge for Dish Network HD service. Yikes !!!

I didn't realize there's a $20/month upcharge for Dish Network HD service. Yikes !!!

FYI:
It also cost more to eat at Outback than MacDonald's. :cool:

Posted from HDBlog.net ...

Bond, HD Bond (James that is)

How do you like the idea of watching 17 of the James Bond films in HD? If you’re a VOOM HD subscriber, check out FILMFEST HD in June.

Not only that, the movies will air uncut and commercial free baby! And for some strange reason, David Hasselhoff will serve as the on-air host.

Here are the movies to be shown:

* Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
* Dr. No (1962)
* For Your Eyes Only (1981)
* From Russia With Love (1963)
* Goldfinger (1964)
* License to Kill (1989)
* Live and Let Die (1973)
* The Living Daylights (1987)
* The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
* Moonraker (1979)
* Never Say Never Again (1983)
* Octopussy (1983)
* On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
* The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
* Thunderball (1967)
* A View to a Kill (1985)
* You Only Live Twice (1968)

http://www.hdblog.net/2006/05/11/bond-hd-bond-james-that-is/

--------------
Posg you can watch David Hasselhoff on Night Rider in June. :D :D :D

A couple of statements from Fred Dressler pulled from another string regarding ESPN2HD. Dressler is TWC's corporate programming executive.

"Espn is withholding this service from us until we agree to pay them for some things that are totally unrelated."

"We are entitled to the espn2hd feed now and want to give it to you at no
additional cost. Short of suing disney/espn, which would take years, we
are trying to negotiate to get it on. Disney is demanding lots of
additional things that will cost you even more money (that's why you
think time warner is screwing you) when all we want is for espn to
delivery what they are already obligated to do."

So who's really the bad guy, the "Wabbit" or the "Mouse" ???

I, for one, blame Time Warner. I know, I know ... poor Time Warner is just sticking up for its beloved subscribers, so they don't have to raise (the already outrageous) rates. Bla, bla, bla.

1. If ESPN requires its cable operators to pay for "unrelated things" to get ESPN2HD, so be it. Are we supposed to believe that they are asking TWC to pay for things that other cable/sat companies do not?

2. If TWC is "entitled" to ESPN2HD, why would they have to negotitate? "Entitled" implies that as part of the existing contract, TWC believes that ESPN should provide ESPN2HD. If that is not explicitly written in the contract language, it's TWC's fault. If it is explicitly part of the contract, it shouldn't take years to litigate.

3. "Obligated" ... see #2.

Is anyone else sick of these excuses and the surrogates who apologize for TWC?

Posted from HDBlog.net ...

Bond, HD Bond (James that is)

How do you like the idea of watching 17 of the James Bond films in HD? If you’re a VOOM HD subscriber, check out FILMFEST HD in June.

Not only that, the movies will air uncut and commercial free baby! And for some strange reason, David Hasselhoff will serve as the on-air host.

Here are the movies to be shown:

* Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
* Dr. No (1962)
* For Your Eyes Only (1981)
* From Russia With Love (1963)
* Goldfinger (1964)
* License to Kill (1989)
* Live and Let Die (1973)
* The Living Daylights (1987)
* The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
* Moonraker (1979)
* Never Say Never Again (1983)
* Octopussy (1983)
* On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
* The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
* Thunderball (1967)
* A View to a Kill (1985)
* You Only Live Twice (1968)

http://www.hdblog.net/2006/05/11/bond-hd-bond-james-that-is/

--------------
Posg you can watch David Hasselhoff on Night Rider in June. :D :D :D

Actually that's pretty cool, if these HD transfers are from digital restored prints. Have the Bond films been remastered ??? I dunno. If not, don't expect these to knock your socks off. But at least they're trying.

And that leaves The Weather Channel and C-SPAN as the only networks who have not had a James Bond marathon. :cool:

Is anyone else sick of these excuses and the surrogates who apologize for TWC?

They are no more sick of TWC and "us surrogates" than those who won't vote with their wallet and switch to DirecTV or Dish.

"True freedom is only available to those who can afford it."

(Or in this case willing to pay for it.) ;) ;) ;)

They are no more sick of TWC and "us surrogates" than those who won't vote with their wallet and switch to DirecTV or Dish.

"True freedom is only available to those who can afford it."

(Or in this case willing to pay for it.) ;) ;) ;)

You're right ... and when DirecTV gets local HD for the Raleigh area, I suspect that many imprisoned by TWCs monopoly will vote with their wallet and choose freedom. Which is exactly what is happening everywhere, especially in TWC markets. The only way they can increase their subs is to buy up bankrupt companies (ex. Adelphia). Sadly, for current Adelphia subs ... once they get gobbled up by TWC, their current carriage agreements will become null and void-- bye, bye ESPN2HD, ESPNU, and the NFL Network (this isn't my opinion ... directly from the altruistic, customer friendly (not) Fred Dressler).

BTW ... where did that quote come from ... Donald Trump or Joseph Stalin?

You're right ... and when DirecTV gets local HD for the Raleigh area, I suspect that many imprisoned by TWCs monopoly will vote with their wallet and choose freedom. Which is exactly what is happening everywhere, especially in TWC markets. The only way they can increase their subs is to buy up bankrupt companies (ex. Adelphia). Sadly, for current Adelphia subs ... once they get gobbled up by TWC, their current carriage agreements will become null and void-- bye, bye ESPN2HD, ESPNU, and the NFL Network (this isn't my opinion ... directly from the altruistic, customer friendly (not) Fred Dressler).

BTW ... where did that quote come from ... Donald Trump or Joseph Stalin?

Actually TWC had huge growth 1st quarter from their existing service areas. Satellite growth has slowed significantly. Like it or not, the pendulum is swinging towards cable.

PS - The quote is mine. :D

Actually TWC had huge growth 1st quarter from their existing service areas. Satellite growth has slowed significantly. Like it or not, the pendulum is swinging towards cable.

PS - The quote is mine. :D

Huge growth for high-speed Internet and digital phone would not surprise. That is not what I'm referring to here. But, huge growth in cable subs (other than those added by the monopolistic local cable model, i.e. TWC taking over for another cable MSO whose contract lapsed ... leaving subs with no choice but TWC) would shock me- with subs leaving (even at a slower rate that the extreme spike and exodus 2002-2004) for satellite.

Hey, if pendulum swinging gets me (as a cable sub) more quality (not the 24x7 advertising channels that TWC has added in the past 2 years ... ex. several shopping, hispanic and religious networks)-- especially HD -- programming, I'll stop bashing TWC.

Huge growth for high-speed Internet and digital phone would not surprise. That is not what I'm referring to here. But, huge growth in cable subs (other than those added by the monopolistic local cable model, i.e. TWC taking over for another cable MSO whose contract lapsed ... leaving subs with no choice but TWC) would shock me- with subs leaving (even at a slower rate that the extreme spike and exodus 2002-2004) for satellite.

Hey, if pendulum swinging gets me (as a cable sub) more quality (not the 24x7 advertising channels that TWC has added in the past 2 years ... ex. several shopping, hispanic and religious networks)-- especially HD -- programming, I'll stop bashing TWC.

82,000 net basic subs growth, 241,000 digital subs added. Best quarter growth in 6 years.

They are no more sick of TWC and "us surrogates" than those who won't vote with their wallet and switch to DirecTV or Dish.

"True freedom is only available to those who can afford it."

(Or in this case willing to pay for it.) ;) ;) ;)

It really ercks me when elitist like yourself say this. :mad:
Your only thing your statements missing is "... go back to africa".

Your statement would make sense if we were talking Walmart and Target. You might have to drive a little further to make your point, but it is feasible.
When you make the same statement about a Monopoly, it is pompous. There are 10's of millions of families that would love to switch to another content provider, but can't. Not all homes are built with an open sky to the SW and then you have renters and apartment dwellers.
When telcos come in and attach to apartments and homes. The combo punch from Telcos and Sat will expos the truth on whether TWC has the praise and loyalty from regular Joes, a few on this forum give it.

And let me state for the record there is nothing wrong with being a Monopoly if you get that way because you are so much better than the competition that everyone uses your product but they still have a choice of other similar products. The lack of choice for so many TWC subscribers, keeps TWC content on being a half @ss provider.

Actually that's pretty cool, if these HD transfers are from digital restored prints. Have the Bond films been remastered ??? I dunno. If not, don't expect these to knock your socks off. But at least they're trying.

And that leaves The Weather Channel and C-SPAN as the only networks who have not had a James Bond marathon. :cool:
The Home of James Bond (http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/dvd_ultimate_editions.php3)

It really ercks me when elitist like yourself say this. :mad:
Your only thing your statements missing is "... go back to africa".

Your statement would make sense if we were talking Walmart and Target. You might have to drive a little further to make your point, but it is feasible.
When you make the same statement about a Monopoly, it is pompous.
Bwaaa-ha-ha! pompousg :D

Bwaaa-ha-ha! pompousg :D

OK, maybe I AM an elitist snob, but I'm OK with it. :D

OK, maybe I AM an elitist snob, but I'm OK with it. :D
That makes two of us. :cool:

It really ercks me when elitist like yourself say this. :mad:
Your only thing your statements missing is "... go back to africa".


I couldn't agree more. Couple this with the "white trash" comments of last week, and you have to wonder about our friend.

82,000 net basic subs growth, 241,000 digital subs added. Best quarter growth in 6 years.

How many of those had a choice? I can't wait until the cable industry gets the same treatment as Ma Bell.

There are 10's of millions of families that would love to switch to another content provider, but can't.

Sorry, but today's day and age has made me a bit cynical - where do you get your stats? There are ~80M basic cable subscribers in the US and you're crediting minimally a quarter of those as being forced beyond their will to purchase cable?

I can't wait until the cable industry gets the same treatment as Ma Bell.

You mean like being granted national franchise agreements instead of having to negotiate with every tiny locality passed?

Sorry, but today's day and age has made me a bit cynical - where do you get your stats? There are ~80M basic cable subscribers in the US and you're crediting minimally a quarter of those as being forced beyond their will to purchase cable?



You mean like being granted national franchise agreements instead of having to negotiate with every tiny locality passed?

I'll let him speak for himself ... but, he didn't say "forced beyond their will to purchase cable". That was you. He said, "who would love to switch to another cable provider, but can't". Actually, I would suspect his estimate to be conservative.

As for my quote ... don't put words in my mouth (via a keyboard). Here's a quote for you ... I believe that the monopolistic cable model is out-dated and, really, (IMO) socialistic. I know, I know ... I am free to "choose" satellite. Whatever my reasons are not to are irrelevant. As is the case with countless (don't ask how I got that statistic) others, I simply want my cable provider to listen to its customers.

Sorry, but today's day and age has made me a bit cynical - where do you get your stats? There are ~80M basic cable subscribers in the US and you're crediting minimally a quarter of those as being forced beyond their will to purchase cable?


Actually I pulled it out of my... well you know.
But it's just common sense. I would go higher than the minimal quarter.
My statement included competition from any other provider, including another cable provider. My point was and is that when cable has no competition in markets such as ours it is a monopoly not on merit but lack of alternative.

If another cable provider or telco came into TWC's territory, TWC would lose a quarter of their subscribers almost immediately ( and that's just here ).
I credit my @ss with that fact too. :)

I couldn't agree more. Couple this with the "white trash" comments of last week, and you have to wonder about our friend.

You all take me way too seriously. I obviously struck a nerve with the "white trash" comment. I use the term in the context of being ignorant and angry by choice rather than disadvantaged by birth. I use the term interchangeably with red neck. But that's neither here nor there.

The interruptation that "voting with your wallet" or "freedom isn't really free" has any racial overtones boggles my mind. I've said before a couple of times that MY intolerance is with ignorance and anger. I am as tolerant with anything else as anyone you'll ever meet.

We're all too quick to be offended or violated. If we can't laugh at ourselves, no wonder the world is turning into such an angry place.

In the bigger picture, none of what we discuss here has any REAL importance at all. I'm only here because I enjoy passionate debate. That's all this is......

http://news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060513/NEWSREC0101/605130302

Another innovation from a company that doesn't give a crap about their subscribers.

"Just the facts, ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday

The Business of TV
Cable taking control of Street

Momentum shift from satellite in Q1
By Lora Kolodny and Georg Szalai The Hollywood Reporter May 13, 2006

NEW YORK -- Stronger-than-expected basic-subscriber additions for cable operators and weaker customer growth for satellite TV providers were a key theme during this first-quarter earnings season, leading Wall Street observers to discuss a possible turning point in competitive momentum among U.S. video distributors.

To be sure, satellite TV continues to win more users than basic cable. However, with the satellite business maturing, new competitors have begun to enter the video market in the form of wireless and regional phone companies along with such new cable offers as triple play, high definition and video-on-demand programming, which are more competitive as well. Cable firms believe they will finally see sustainable growth along with continued basic customer gains.


When News Corp.-controlled DirecTV Group reported weaker-than-thought first-quarter net subscriber additions this month, management revised its guidance, saying the satellite operator might add fewer than 1 million subscribers this year rather than slightly more. Wall Street took note.

"DirecTV is on the verge of seeing slowing subscriber growth as a result of cable becoming more effective due to increased availability of triple-play bundled offers, video-on-demand and digital-video recorders," Credit Suisse analyst Bryan Kraft wrote. "In addition, we believe that (telecom) entry into video will put further pressure on satellite churn and gross additions."

EchoStar Communications' report last week included net subscriber additions that also underwhelmed many on Wall Street, serving as a confirmation of the trend.

"We would not be surprised if DirecTV pulls back as well on the concern that EchoStar's mixed results were further evidence that satellite TV's competitive challenges have increased," Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Thomas Eagan said.

Bear Stearns analyst Robert Peck said reasons for EchoStar's higher-than-expected churn, or customer turnover, in the latest quarter were not just trend-based, but company specific.

"Increased competition, channel takedowns due to disputes and higher-than-expected disconnects following the February 2006 (monthly) price hike" all were on his list.

EchoStar's Dish Network added 225,000 net subscribers in the quarter. That lagged DirecTV's numbers -- the U.S. satellite competitor added 255,000. Both satellite firms' net additions outpaced basic video subscriber gains at Comcast, Charter, Mediacom and Time Warner Cable. But a look at cable operators' gains in digital-video subscribers told a story favoring land-based cable.

Comcast added 340,000, Time Warner Cable 241,000, Charter 69,800 and even Mediacom (which lost 39,000 basic subscribers) added 67,000 digital-video subscribers in the period ending March 31.

Of course, some caution that investors will have to see subscriber growth numbers for several quarters into the future to know if the trend of strengthening cable and weakening satellite user gains will stick.

Cable executives have all but asserted their dominance over the once-threatening satellite providers. TWC chief operating officer Landel Hobbs said last week that features "satellite just can't offer" -- namely Internet high-speed data and VOD products -- now drive his firm's growth.

"Our sustained growth depends on our ability to innovate when and where it counts," he added.

Analysts and investors will keep close tabs on subscriber momentum for the rest of the year. They might ask industry veterans for advice as one investor did with cable pioneer and Liberty Media chairman John Malone on the sidelines of his firm's annual investor meeting Thursday.

Said Malone about the current competitive situation between cable and satellite TV: "I still think cable has an awfully strong hand in the U.S.," especially given the recent success of bundled services.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/th...t_id=1002502409

"Just the facts, ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday

The Business of TV
Cable taking control of Street
Outta thin air, outta my butt or tapped out in Morse Code by my cat scratching it's collar, cable will be in the fight of it's life when TEL gets its act together on providing video services.

The FUD campaign cable waged against SAT will not work against TEL. Cable has no inherent technical advantage over TEL and TEL's got the same poles and right-of-way as cable. It's got a wire to the house and the same shot as cable at replacing that wire with fiber. Arguably, being a start-up, SAT was undercapitalized and could not efffectively respond to cable's attacks. Obviously, that is NOT an issue with TEL.

Just my $.02.

Outta thin air, outta my butt or tapped out in Morse Code by my cat scratching it's collar, cable will be in the fight of it's life when TEL gets its act together on providing video services.

The FUD campaign cable waged against SAT will not work against TEL. Cable has no inherent technical advantage over TEL and TEL's got the same poles and right-of-way as cable. It's got a wire to the house and the same shot as cable at replacing that wire with fiber. Arguably, being a start-up, SAT was undercapitalized and could not efffectively respond to cable's attacks. Obviously, that is NOT an issue with TEL.

Just my $.02.

Telco offers two solutions, the Verizon FIOS "fiber to the home" (FTTH) model, which is extremely expensive and slow to impliment, and the AT&T Project Lightspeed "fiber to the node" (FTTN) model, which has severe bandwidth limitations.

Should either or both of these solutions be successful, (and the jury is still out), the battlefield will be between cable and telco, with satellite becoming an effectively obsolete technology. And nobody knows this better than the satellite guys. That's why they rely so heavily on the "service contract in exchange for equipment" model.

Personally, I would seriously consider "jumping ship" to a telco should they offer compelling programming and pricing advantages. I hope someday I have the choice.

In the meantime, just the threat will force all parties to continue to innovate and invest and, with apologies to Martha, "That's a good thing."

You all take me way too seriously. I obviously struck a nerve with the "white trash" comment. I use the term in the context of being ignorant and angry by choice rather than disadvantaged by birth. I use the term interchangeably with red neck. But that's neither here nor there.

The interruptation that "voting with your wallet" or "freedom isn't really free" has any racial overtones boggles my mind. I've said before a couple of times that MY intolerance is with ignorance and anger. I am as tolerant with anything else as anyone you'll ever meet.

We're all too quick to be offended or violated. If we can't laugh at ourselves, no wonder the world is turning into such an angry place.

In the bigger picture, none of what we discuss here has any REAL importance at all. I'm only here because I enjoy passionate debate. That's all this is......

Hey, I think you are getting a bad rap. I think you are completely intolerant when it comes to Cable and possible cable competitors.
But when it comes to social tolerance I think you are as noble and self righteous as any liberal. :)
I myself can never be accused of discriminating, I hate every group equally. ;)

interruptation......

Might want to enable spell check.

Hey, I think you are getting a bad rap. I think you are completely intolerant when it comes to Cable and possible cable competitors.
But when it comes to social tolerance I think you are as noble and self righteous as any liberal. :)
I myself can never be accused of discriminating, I hate every group equally. ;)
I've got a GREAT idea for unifying this thread; get some Yankee loudmouth to call y'all a bunch of ignorant rednecks. Now if only someone would step up and do that . . .

:D

Hey, I think you are getting a bad rap. I think you are completely intolerant when it comes to Cable and possible cable competitors.
But when it comes to social tolerance I think you are as noble and self righteous as any liberal. :)
I myself can never be accused of discriminating, I hate every group equally. ;)

I agree 100% (again). I like individuals, I hate groups. I have always been a free thinker. Please do not classify me as a liberal (or conservative for that matter). Once a member of either of those groups, I've lost my ability to listen and learn. ;)

Might want to enable spell check.

Now see, that's getting personal. :mad:

I've got a GREAT idea for unifying this thread; get some Yankee loudmouth to call y'all a bunch of ignorant rednecks. Now if only someone would step up and do that . . .

:D

Really BAD idea. Arguing "Gray Bars" vs "Black Bars" is OK. "Stars & Stripes" vs "Stars & Bars" well, my guess is we don't want to go there. I'm a transplant down here after all !!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

Let the flames begin...

As a native, I remember when Cary was a very nice little town of about 2000 people, before it became the Central Area for Relocated Yankees....

I don't remember a murder but someone did steal the metal schoolboy sign from the high school one time.. Our biggest worry was that Apex would beat us in football.

You could get WPTF with a crystal radio ..no battery required. TTA consisted of flagging down a Trailways or Greyhound. If you had a telephone, you could play CIA and listen in on the party line. New cars cost less than a HD TV. In fact you could be a crappy house for less than a 50" plasma.

Vietnam was something the Vet used on a sick horse. Why doesn't the press ever talk about the "Police Action" in Korea? After 56 years, can't we bring our boys home...

I don't remember as many mosquitos or any lawyers.....

The wild blackberries were sweeter then.... :rolleyes:

And all we need now is Neil Young . . . :eek: :)

http://news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060513/NEWSREC0101/605130302

Another innovation from a company that doesn't give a crap about their subscribers.

That does look like a killer feature.
In the digital age when the entire show can be sent in a fraction of the runtime, I have often wondered why the previous hour couldn't be sent along with the live footage. I really started wishing for this when I got SAT Radio. I often get in the car and listen to Talk Radio to be somewhat behind as references to previous callers or guest are brought up.

Although it's pretty easy to get up to speed on Night Rider without this feature. :D

And all we need now is Neil Young . . . :eek: :)

Actually went with a tech to run a service call at Neil Young's house in either Orinda or Lafayette, CA a while back, early 80's. Neil wasn't there. Neil was really into model railroading.

That does look like a killer feature.
In the digital age when the entire show can be sent in a fraction of the runtime, I have often wondered why the previous hour couldn't be sent along with the live footage. I really started wishing for this when I got SAT Radio. I often get in the car and listen to Talk Radio to be somewhat behind as references to previous callers or guest are brought up.

Although it's pretty easy to get up to speed on Night Rider without this feature. :D

Just the first step in a totally hybrid "linear/on demand" system. The idea is to get the expensive hardware, i.e. DVR, out of the house and into the cable office.

Once everything is archived for several weeks on a central server, the DVR becomes somewhat superfluous. This is what a scalable segmentable two way fat pipe allows that a one way linear system cannot. This is one nail in the satellite coffin.

P.S. TWC seems to have pretty much gotten rid of the wait times for VOD. It is strictly a matter of adjusting some allocations and reducing node sizes.

By the way, I've never seen an episode of "Knight Rider" then or now. Am I missing something? I became disenchanted with talking car programs after seeing "My Mother the Car" with Jerry Van Dyke back in the 60's.

Wow, it was bad enough that NBC17 pre-empted the "retrospective" of West Wing with an hour of watching the weather radar, but then not to show the series finale of West Wing in HD was just ashame. I remember when weather information could be scrolled across the bottom of the screen. But I guess when every station invested in their Doppler 200000000000000 (TM) radar systems they had to turn it into a spectacle.

To be fair, WRAL also decided a half hour weather spectacle was in order and delayed Survivor 30 minutes. Good thing we started watching that live, or we would have missed the last 30 minutes.

You know, both NBC *and* WRAL have weather subchannels. Why not just scroll something saying "for updated information of the storm tune to 17-2 or cable channel [whatever]." Is it really necessary to pre-emp season and series finales to watch talking heads and color radar?

Well, I'm off to an alternate source to get the West Wing Series finale. No ads watched by me for the local affiliate. When nobody watches you, remember that serving the customer is a good way to keep viewers.

Wow, it was bad enough that NBC17 pre-empted the "retrospective" of West Wing with an hour of watching the weather radar, but then not to show the series finale of West Wing in HD was just ashame. I remember when weather information could be scrolled across the bottom of the screen. But I guess when every station invested in their Doppler 200000000000000 (TM) radar systems they had to turn it into a spectacle.

To be fair, WRAL also decided a half hour weather spectacle was in order and delayed Survivor 30 minutes. Good thing we started watching that live, or we would have missed the last 30 minutes.

You know, both NBC *and* WRAL have weather subchannels. Why not just scroll something saying "for updated information of the storm tune to 17-2 or cable channel [whatever]." Is it really necessary to pre-emp season and series finales to watch talking heads and color radar?

Well, I'm off to an alternate source to get the West Wing Series finale. No ads watched by me for the local affiliate. When nobody watches you, remember that serving the customer is a good way to keep viewers.

WNCN needs to be embarrassed or have a darn good explanation. Everything was in HD on WITN so they can't blame the network.

For the life of me, I don't understand when local affiliates dump network shows for ACC basketball or weather or whatever, they don't at least show the network show on a digital sidecar channel.

Actually went with a tech to run a service call at Neil Young's house in either Orinda or Lafayette, CA a while back, early 80's. Neil wasn't there. Neil was really into model railroading.
Sopranos last night Janice was bitchin' to Tony about him making fun of Bpbby for playing with trains - T said he's a grown man - Janice said what about Neil Young - and Tony said "He owns Lionel." So yeah, I guess he *is* into model railroading. :)

WNCN needs to be embarrassed or have a darn good explanation. Everything was in HD on WITN so they can't blame the network.

For the life of me, I don't understand when local affiliates dump network shows for ACC basketball or weather or whatever, they don't at least show the network show on a digital sidecar channel.

I hate the weather interuptions also, I guess last night they were at least warning about tornados. But it definitely could have been done with a scroll with the jist and that details are on their weather channel.

But when it comes to College Basketball around here, more people are watching the game than would watch "Commander and Chief" or other crappy primetime drama. Of course since JP doesn't do HD they could put the game on a second channel and split the bandwith and the viewers. But then again, that is easy for us to say since we all have digital OTA tuners.

I hate the weather interuptions also, I guess last night they were at least warning about tornados. But it definitely could have been done with a scroll with the jist and that details are on their weather channel.

But when it comes to College Basketball around here, more people are watching the game than would watch "Commander and Chief" or other crappy primetime drama. Of course since JP doesn't do HD they could put the game on a second channel and split the bandwith and the viewers. But then again, that is easy for us to say since we all have digital OTA tuners.

Back when I lived in Idaho and had distant locals from LA, there were SO MANY premptions of regular program with wall to wall helicopter coverage of vehicle chases that I switched to Dish to get Seattle locals.

That was pre "must carry", pre "spot beam" when all the locals were on the national beam from the core satellites and Dish would sell you ANY market you wanted, if qualified for distant signals.

I think it was the LA WB or FOX affilitate that would leave you a voice mail on your cell phone to alert you to "live" coverage of a car chase.

During primetime, they would put the chase in a window on top of the main program. ALL the major channels would follow the chase to it's conclusion.

Back when I lived in Idaho and had distant locals from LA, there were SO MANY premptions of regular program with wall to wall helicopter coverage of vehicle chases that I switched to Dish to get Seattle locals.

That was pre "must carry", pre "spot beam" when all the locals were on the national beam from the core satellites and Dish would sell you ANY market you wanted, if qualified for distant signals.

I think it was the LA WB or FOX affilitate that would leave you a voice mail on your cell phone to alert you to "live" coverage of a car chase.

During primetime, they would put the chase in a window on top of the main program. ALL the major channels would follow the chase to it's conclusion.

Yea I had the west coast networks years ago before the unconstitutional law was passed saying I could not legally receive them anymore. :mad: And I remember car chase interruptions from time to time. I don't think any market loves their Weather like this one though. Greg Fishel is a celebrity around here that gets lots of face time for what might just be a flake or even a windy day.

Back to that damn law... I can subscribe to any newspaper or magazine from any local market, but it is somehow illegal to do the same with Local TV Stations. Corrupt politicians and Station Owners that are afraid to compete are to blame on this one.
Does anyone know how this is handled over seas ?

Yea I had the west coast networks years ago before the unconstitutional law was passed saying I could not legally receive them anymore. :mad: And I remember car chase interruptions from time to time. I don't think any market loves their Weather like this one though. Greg Fishel is a celebrity around here that gets lots of face time for what might just be a flake or even a windy day.

Back to that damn law... I can subscribe to any newspaper or magazine from any local market, but it is somehow illegal to do the same with Local TV Stations. Corrupt politicians and Station Owners that are afraid to compete are to blame on this one.
Does anyone know how this is handled over seas ?

This is one thing that I whole heartedly agree with you on. The LOGIC is that local broadcasters need to be protected from competition by the importation of out-of-market signals by cable (and satellite) in order to protect their financial viability SO THAT NON-CABLE HOUSEHOLDS ARE NOT DENIED SERVICE.

The law was written to protect viewers, not broadcasters. Broadcasters seem to have forgotten that rationale.

I spent some time in the UK. They don't have "local" stations, just local transmitters. The five national services, BBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5, are offered in "freeview" over SkyTV.

This would be a brilliant strategy for DirecTV and/or Dish Network to take in response to the analog shutoff. "We'll sell you a dish and receiver for $50 (same as what it is speculated the FEMA boxes will cost) and give you FREE locals forever." Getting the equipment in the door is half the battle. Worked in the UK.

Sorry dudes - putting a scroll at the bottom of the screen that says "goto our weather channel for more info" is NOT going to cut it yet - at least not until analog is dead and buried. Much better that the important stuff (public safety) is on and you can watch your "reality TV" fix "in it's entireity" after the event has passed.

Sorry dudes - putting a scroll at the bottom of the screen that says "goto our weather channel for more info" is NOT going to cut it yet - at least not until analog is dead and buried. Much better that the important stuff (public safety) is on and you can watch your "reality TV" fix "in it's entireity" after the event has passed.

By interrupting the scheduled programming with Safety and Weather Alerts you are doing nothing more than adding to the Over Crowding and Unemployment problems facing our nation. :rolleyes:

All of the local stations had very extended weather coverage. I had several things programmed to record and this coverage screwed every one up. I think that it all could have been handled with a crawler across the bottom of the screen but you know how the media likes to hipe things up.

By interrupting the scheduled programming with Safety and Weather Alerts you are doing nothing more than adding to the Over Crowding and Unemployment problems facing our nation. :rolleyes:
I'd love to be able to scroll this thread across the bottom of my computer monitors. Databases, spreadsheets, CRM, etc, are all sooo boring . . . ;)

Sorry dudes - putting a scroll at the bottom of the screen that says "goto our weather channel for more info" is NOT going to cut it yet - at least not until analog is dead and buried. Much better that the important stuff (public safety) is on and you can watch your "reality TV" fix "in it's entireity" after the event has passed.

A scroll at the bottom of the screen advising viewers of weather warnings is sufficient. Wall to wall coverage with fancy graphics is vain and gratuitous. I've lived in states (Texas and Indiana) where you would NEVER SEE a network program if they were as obsessed with weather coverage as they are here.

Jeez, it's just a little rain, for heaven's sakes !!!!

I'd love to be able to scroll this thread across the bottom of my computer monitors. Databases, spreadsheets, CRM, etc, are all sooo boring . . . ;)

You'd never get any work done....

You'd never get any work done....
Not much different than now. :)

I'd love to be able to scroll this thread across the bottom of my computer monitors. Databases, spreadsheets, CRM, etc, are all sooo boring . . . ;)

I'm sure you could find a nice home down here, the locals would keep you entertained 24\7. With all the Yankees already here, what's one more. ;)
Of course if Congress doesn't act quick me and my neighbors are going to start building our own wall. :)

I'm sure you could find a nice home down here, the locals would keep you entertained 24\7. With all the Yankees already here, what's one more. ;)
Of course if Congress doesn't act quick me and my neighbors are going to start building our own wall. :)

I think the locals already keep him entertained.

Ah, sad, but the war in Iraq will end much sooner than the war between the states. :( :( :(

I often get in the car and listen to Talk Radio to be somewhat behind as references to previous callers or guest are brought up.

Be extremely cautious. Talk radio can rot your brain. ;)

I'm sure you could find a nice home down here, the locals would keep you entertained 24\7. With all the Yankees already here, what's one more. ;)
OK, but I'd need to stay out of Oldemanphil's way! :)

OK, but I'd need to stay out of Oldemanphil's way! :)

Congratulations on your 4,000th post !!!

Congratulations on your 4,000th post !!!

This sounds like a good time to revisit the Quantity vs Quality argument. :D

Hey, I 'm somewhat open minded.. ;)

My first wife was a Yankee.... She never did learn to cook....

I'm still pissed at TWC for encoding Discovery HD on QAM. I'm already paying for two STBs and refuse to pay for another.

Anyway, congrats on 4000...

This is one thing that I whole heartedly agree with you on. The LOGIC is that local broadcasters need to be protected from competition by the importation of out-of-market signals by cable (and satellite) in order to protect their financial viability SO THAT NON-CABLE HOUSEHOLDS ARE NOT DENIED SERVICE.


How much of it is that, and how much of it is something as simple as the NFL (or NBA, or the ACC, or whatever pro or college sports league) wanting to make me purchase an expensive "season ticket" package?

Let's say, I'm from Buffalo originally, but living out of market in an NFC town and the Bills are the only NFL team I care about. Since the Bills are mediocre, and do not draw national audiences, I get to see maybe one game a year on network TV if I'm lucky. This is because the locals in my new area show games of local or national interest. If I could subscribe to SAT and select the Buffalo locals, then I'd get at least 1/2 the games. But the NFL would miss the opportunity to rip me off for their "season ticket".

BTW, I remember an internet startup that would let you view out-of-market TV that got shot down due to this same bogosity.

And this is also the reason we can't watch decent coverage of the Olympics from the BBC or the CBC. I really miss living in Buffalo and watching the Olympics on the CBC stations across the lake in Toronto..

Drew

How much of it is that, and how much of it is something as simple as the NFL (or NBA, or the ACC, or whatever pro or college sports league) wanting to make me purchase an expensive "season ticket" package?

Let's say, I'm from Buffalo originally, but living out of market in an NFC town and the Bills are the only NFL team I care about. Since the Bills are mediocre, and do not draw national audiences, I get to see maybe one game a year on network TV if I'm lucky. This is because the locals in my new area show games of local or national interest. If I could subscribe to SAT and select the Buffalo locals, then I'd get at least 1/2 the games. But the NFL would miss the opportunity to rip me off for their "season ticket".

BTW, I remember an internet startup that would let you view out-of-market TV that got shot down due to this same bogosity.

And this is also the reason we can't watch decent coverage of the Olympics from the BBC or the CBC. I really miss living in Buffalo and watching the Olympics on the CBC stations across the lake in Toronto..

Drew

These rules are ancient and have nothing to do with sports. These are FCC rules written to protect viewers. The sport rules are written by the leagues themselves to protect local gate receipts.

These rules are ancient and have nothing to do with sports. These are FCC rules written to protect viewers. The sport rules are written by the leagues themselves to protect local gate receipts.

The rules may be ancient and their are definitely more dogs in the fight to keep change from coming. I would sign up for Washington DC locals just for the Skins and lots of others would too. National advertisers would then buy up all the ad time driving prices up for all the major markets Charlotte included. The local TV stations could work out contracts that forced Ad time in other less desirable time slots also. It sounds like local markets could stand to make a lot more money, but I could be missing something.

The rules may be ancient and their are definitely more dogs in the fight to keep change from coming. I would sign up for Washington DC locals just for the Skins and lots of others would too. National advertisers would then buy up all the ad time driving prices up for all the major markets Charlotte included. The local TV stations could work out contracts that forced Ad time in other less desirable time slots also. It sounds like local markets could stand to make a lot more money, but I could be missing something.

The problem with your argument is the assumption that station revenue is related to national advertising dollars. In reality, that is not the case at all. Stations are made or broken on the strength of local advertsing sales. Local news is the most important product a station has to sell. Their rates are based on the strength of their local news.

The new CW network is actually asking for "reverse compensation" where the station PAYS for the right to air the network, commercials and all, in exchange for a few minutes an hour of local spots. Not so different than simple syndicated programming. If a station airs "Wheel of Fortune", they buy the program from the supplier, commercials and all, and get a couple of minutes of local time to sell.

The danger is not so much Raleigh stations loosing viewers to Washington DC, as it is Greenville-New Bern-Washington stations loosing viewers to Raleigh, or Tyler, TX loosing viewers to Dallas.

What you would end up with is probably 50 TV markets, a lot of satellite and/or translator stations, less localism, fewer jobs in the industry. I'm not saying that's a totally bad thing, especially since more and more stations are falling into fewer and fewer hands, localism is a dying cause anyway. But it would kill off a lot of stations.

This sounds like a good time to revisit the Quantity vs Quality argument. :D
Dammit dslate69, you've outed me. ;)

Hey, I 'm somewhat open minded.. ;)

My first wife was a Yankee.... She never did learn to cook....

Having lived in Texas, I'm still having a problem with people calling dry chewy pork with vinegar on it "Bar-B-Que".

I'm not sure what it is, but I am positive what it is not !!! :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Having lived in Texas, I'm still having a problem with people calling dry chewy pork with vinegar on it "Bar-B-Que".

I'm not sure what it is, but I am positive what it is not !!! :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:


HAHA I couldn't agree with you more!

...
What you would end up with is probably 50 TV markets, a lot of satellite and/or translator stations, less localism, fewer jobs in the industry. I'm not saying that's a totally bad thing, especially since more and more stations are falling into fewer and fewer hands, localism is a dying cause anyway. But it would kill off a lot of stations.

The ones that earn the viewers would survive. Free market is funny that way. Walmart will eventually run Kmart out of business, maybe congress should write a law to keep them around because some people work there. :( Of course Walmart would need some more help if they have more customers.

The ones that earn the viewers would survive. Free market is funny that way. Walmart will eventually run Kmart out of business, maybe congress should write a law to keep them around because some people work there. :( Of course Walmart would need some more help if they have more customers.

So, how would you feel if our local news was all from Charlotte? Or maybe Atlanta? I already feel kind of bad for some of the "outlying" areas who have to see their "local" Raleigh news even though they don't live all that close to Raleigh (or even in the state for some of the southern parts of Virginia).

PLEASE STOP THE OFF-TOPIC DIATRIBES!!!

There was a time this was an informative forum until it was hijacked by esoteric dribble and one-ups-manship. Could we please keep to the topic - Raleigh, NC - HDTV?

Thank you.

So, how would you feel if our local news was all from Charlotte? Or maybe Atlanta? I already feel kind of bad for some of the "outlying" areas who have to see their "local" Raleigh news even though they don't live all that close to Raleigh (or even in the state for some of the southern parts of Virginia).

Well for one thing we have too many local weather stations right now. Trimming it up would be ok with me. But don't forget being able to receive out of market locals doesn't mean the death of all outlying local station. There are plenty of OTA watchers out there as this forum will attest. And if TWC can give you Atlanta, that would be on top of the local market they already provide. It is on SAT that customers might want to save the $5 and just get one out of market and not the one they are in. I myself would get Raleigh, DC, and a West Coast.

Posg is the one that said we would be left with 50 markets. That was ludicrous. It gets old all ways proving him wrong so I let that slide. :)

PLEASE STOP THE OFF-TOPIC DIATRIBES!!!

There was a time this was an informative forum until it was hijacked by esoteric dribble and one-ups-manship. Could we please keep to the topic - Raleigh, NC - HDTV?

Thank you.

But that's what makes this string fun !!! We could talk endlessly about which antennas to use, or whether or not stations should have grey side bars.

There's just not all that much to talk about. Visit the Greensboro thread. I think they've had two posts in the last two weeks. BORING.

The fact that we talk about things other than WNCN's technical issues to me is a big plus. I think the heavy users of this string would agree. Help guys :( :( :(

PLEASE STOP THE OFF-TOPIC DIATRIBES!!!

There was a time this was an informative forum until it was hijacked by esoteric dribble and one-ups-manship. Could we please keep to the topic - Raleigh, NC - HDTV?

Thank you.

If you got something on topic to say, by all means say it.
I didn't know you were setting the agenda for todays meeting. Discussing "out of market locals" and how they would effect "in market locals" seems to be on topic to me.

This forum if nothing else is lively, it could dry up quick if we only asked and answered HDTV technical questions. :(

The ones that earn the viewers would survive. Free market is funny that way. Walmart will eventually run Kmart out of business, maybe congress should write a law to keep them around because some people work there. :( Of course Walmart would need some more help if they have more customers.

What you suggest can never happen because the NAB lobbyists will get the liberals to say "Changing the TV distribution model will effectively deny service to the poor, aged and homeless", and get the conservatives to say "Changing the TV distributiom model will upset our capitalization schemes and cause us to shut down stations and disappoint investers."

Posg is the one that said we would be left with 50 markets. That was ludicrous. It gets old all ways proving him wrong so I let that slide. :)

OK, then, maybe 75 ;) ;) ;)

I HATE being wrong ALL the time. Maybe I should run for political office ???

Does anybody know when the Triangle will get MPEG4 locals on DirecTV?

PLEASE STOP THE OFF-TOPIC DIATRIBES!!!

There was a time this was an informative forum until it was hijacked by esoteric dribble and one-ups-manship. Could we please keep to the topic - Raleigh, NC - HDTV?

Thank you.

Post 3911:

I watch OTA all the time. There's no cable available where I live. We have DirecTV and HD OTA.

Steve


Post 3343:

A quick update. We moved the optical audio cable from the TV to the SA83000HD and now have Dolby Digital coming throught the A/V receiver. The Panthers victory "sounded" great!!!

Thanks to you and others on this forum for your assistance in helping me get a better understanding of HDMI.

Steve

I'm confused. Is DirecTV using the SA8300HD ??? BUSTED !!!!

Does anybody know when the Triangle will get MPEG4 locals on DirecTV?


DIRECTV Announces Next 24 Markets to Receive High-Definition Local Channels in Spring 2006; Local HD Markets Will Total 36, Representing More Than 58 Percent of U.S. Television Homes
EL SEGUNDO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 22, 2006--Continuing to widely expand its local high-definition (HD) programming services, DIRECTV, Inc. (NYSE: DTV), the nation's leading digital television service provider, today named the next 24 U.S. markets that will receive local HD programming.

Beginning in April of this year, DIRECTV will roll out the first of the 24 new markets, offering HD programming from the four primary broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC. Customers with the appropriate DIRECTV HD receiving equipment, who subscribe to a programming package that includes local channels, will receive both the standard and HD signals at no extra monthly charge.

The 24 local markets to receive HD programming include:

Baltimore Minneapolis, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala. Nashville, Tenn.
Charlotte, N.C. Orlando, Fla.
Cleveland Phoenix
Columbus, Ohio Pittsburgh
Denver Raleigh, N.C.
Fresno, Calif. Sacramento, Calif.
Hartford, Conn. Salt Lake City
Indianapolis San Diego
Kansas City, Mo./Kan. Seattle
Miami St Louis, Mo.
Milwaukee, Wisc. West Palm Beach, Fla.

There. Is that on topic enough??????

Post 3911:

I watch OTA all the time. There's no cable available where I live. We have DirecTV and HD OTA.

Steve


Post 3343:

A quick update. We moved the optical audio cable from the TV to the SA83000HD and now have Dolby Digital coming throught the A/V receiver. The Panthers victory "sounded" great!!!

Thanks to you and others on this forum for your assistance in helping me get a better understanding of HDMI.

Steve

I'm confused. Is DirecTV using the SA8300HD ??? BUSTED !!!!


posg,

I'm not sure what your point is here. I have DirecTV, my friend has a SA8300HD (since you have so much time to search the entire forum, you might want to look at my post #3336).

Your previous post is exactly what I was referring to in asking these off-topic diatribes stop. This forum has been used extensively by me and others as a resource for great information to enhance our HDTV experience in the Raleigh area whether we receive HD over-the-air, via cable, or DirecTV. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks, most of the discussion in the forum by you and a few others has been completely off-topic. Not only is this rude to the vast majority of the forum readers, but it degrades the quality of the forum and chases people off who might have something valuable to add to the forum. I would ask again that you take your off-topic discussions elsewhere.

Steve

SteveFitz1,

There may be a lot of "background noise" on this thread - I'm part of it sometimes - but these folks are extremely knowledgeable on the "topic" at hand and very helpful. I have never seen a poster's query go un-answered. Everyone that shows up with a problem gets assistance. (I believe a few of your posts expressed gratitude for the help you got.) Having said that. when there's nothing exactly on-topic to discuss, that's exactly what gets discussed - nothing on-topic. Possible downside? Someone searching the thread has more pages to scan. But then if they simply ask, they get help. I'm on some other threads where posters who obviously did not spend any time searching get blown off. The only real downside I see is consuming our hosts' bandwidth and other resources. To counter that, I suggest we all go pay the measely $35 to become an AVS Club Mmeber.

Just my $.02.

YMMV.

:)

posg,

I'm not sure what your point is here. I have DirecTV, my friend has a SA8300HD (since you have so much time to search the entire forum, you might want to look at my post #3336).

Your previous post is exactly what I was referring to in asking these off-topic diatribes stop. This forum has been used extensively by me and others as a resource for great information to enhance our HDTV experience in the Raleigh area whether we receive HD over-the-air, via cable, or DirecTV. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks, most of the discussion in the forum by you and a few others has been completely off-topic. Not only is this rude to the vast majority of the forum readers, but it degrades the quality of the forum and chases people off who might have something valuable to add to the forum. I would ask again that you take your off-topic discussions elsewhere.

Steve

With all due respect, I have on several occasions offered advice and assistance to those who have cable reception issues, connection questions, etc. Again, posts like "Did anybody else see break-ups during American Idol last night" are no more useful than those who constantly bash TWC, or talk about Bar-B-Que.

My suggestion is that if you really want to control the content on this string that you volunteer to be a moderator. ;) ;) ;)

...
Your previous post is exactly what I was referring to in asking these off-topic diatribes stop. This forum has been used extensively by me and others as a resource for great information to enhance our HDTV experience in the Raleigh area whether we receive HD over-the-air, via cable, or DirecTV. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks, most of the discussion in the forum by you and a few others has been completely off-topic. Not only is this rude to the vast majority of the forum readers, but it degrades the quality of the forum and chases people off who might have something valuable to add to the forum. I would ask again that you take your off-topic discussions elsewhere.
Steve

Have you or anyone else asked an "on topic" question or comment, that wasn't quickly responded to? I don't think so. I think your complaint is completely "off topic" and unproductive. If you posted a question that was ignored while we all had a active discussion on "Nascar"; then you may have a point.

Have your second cup of coffee. :)

SteveFitz1,

There may be a lot of "background noise" on this thread - I'm part of it sometimes - but these folks are extremely knowledgeable on the "topic" at hand and very helpful. I have never seen a poster's query go un-answered. Everyone that shows up with a problem gets assistance. (I believe a few of your posts expressed gratitude for the help you got.) Having said that. when there's nothing exactly on-topic to discuss, that's exactly what gets discussed - nothing on-topic. Possible downside? Someone searching the thread has more pages to scan. But then if they simply ask, they get help. I'm on some other threads where posters who obviously did not spend any time searching get blown off. The only real downside I see is consuming our hosts' bandwidth and other resources. To counter that, I suggest we all go pay the measely $35 to become an AVS Club Mmeber.

Just my $.02.

YMMV.

:)

Brilliant !!!! Thanks.

Steve's opinion should be respected even if we disagree. And his complaint should be addressed respectfully.

:)

Steve's opinion should be respected even if we disagree. And his complaint should be addressed respectfully.

:)

Why should Steve get preferential treatment. :mad:

Why should Steve get preferential treatment. :mad:
Touché! ;)

SteveFitz1,

There may be a lot of "background noise" on this thread - I'm part of it sometimes - but these folks are extremely knowledgeable on the "topic" at hand and very helpful. I have never seen a poster's query go un-answered. Everyone that shows up with a problem gets assistance. (I believe a few of your posts expressed gratitude for the help you got.) Having said that. when there's nothing exactly on-topic to discuss, that's exactly what gets discussed - nothing on-topic. Possible downside? Someone searching the thread has more pages to scan. But then if they simply ask, they get help. I'm on some other threads where posters who obviously did not spend any time searching get blown off. The only real downside I see is consuming our hosts' bandwidth and other resources. To counter that, I suggest we all go pay the measely $35 to become an AVS Club Mmeber.

Just my $.02.

YMMV.

:)
Uhhhhhh, cheers? :confused: ;)

DIRECTV Announces Next 24 Markets to Receive High-Definition Local Channels in Spring 2006; Local HD Markets Will Total 36, Representing More Than 58 Percent of U.S. Television Homes
EL SEGUNDO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 22, 2006--Continuing to widely expand its local high-definition (HD) programming services, DIRECTV, Inc. (NYSE: DTV), the nation's leading digital television service provider, today named the next 24 U.S. markets that will receive local HD programming.

Beginning in April of this year, DIRECTV will roll out the first of the 24 new markets, offering HD programming from the four primary broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC. Customers with the appropriate DIRECTV HD receiving equipment, who subscribe to a programming package that includes local channels, will receive both the standard and HD signals at no extra monthly charge.

The 24 local markets to receive HD programming include:

Raleigh, N.C.



Hmmm, so we are supposed to already have them? OK, that's good news and bad news at the same time I guess.

I want MonstersHD and KungFu HD on TWC. :(

American Customer Satisfaction Index Scores

The scores:
DirecTV 71 (+6.0% over last year)
Dish 68 (-4.2%)
Cox 63 (no change)
Time Warner 61 (no change)
Comcast 60 (+3.4%)
Charter 55 (11.8%)
All cable and satellite 63 (+3.3%)

http://www.theacsi.org/first_quarter.htm

At least Time Warner's poll numbers are doing a little better than (DELETED). Winky Winky

Hmmm, so we are supposed to already have them? OK, that's good news and bad news at the same time I guess.

You'll be better off if you let them exhausted their supply of the simply awful first generation dish before they start doing installations locally.

I want MonstersHD and KungFu HD on TWC. :(

These channels are the remenants of VOOM, which was once a competitor to Dish and DirecTV. Yeah, nobody else heard of it either. Dish bought the remains, mostly for the transponder real estate, but still continues, for now, to offer the VOOM HD channels. So they are essentially "in house exclusives" for Dish and will remain so.

I want MonstersHD and KungFu HD on TWC. :(

I always stop on KungFu-HD when surfing, to catch a good fight scene. :cool:
I find myself watching the Animania HD (animation & cartoons) alot with my 4yr daughter. All the bright and random colors and motion is great in HD.

I always stop on KungFu-HD when surfing, to catch a good fight scene. :cool:
I find myself watching the Animania HD (animation & cartoons) alot with my 4yr daughter. All the bright and random colors and motion is great in HD.
Yeegads! I thought the poster was joking. KungFuHD? MonstersHD? We must be at 570 channels and nothing on.

Yeegads! I thought the poster was joking. KungFuHD? MonstersHD? We must be at 570 channels and nothing on.

Had Voom not gone under only a month after I bought my plasma, I would have been a subscriber.
I started reading the VOOM forums (over on satelliteguys) and was all set until the bad news broke.
They had the few channels I cared about, and as for their "filler" channels.. at least they were HD :)

I applaud the idea behind the company, perhaps they were just ahead of their time. As we all have
stated, HD content is in short supply.

Mike

Now Playing on Monsters HD (really!!!):


Prince of Space SciFi
NR *+

1959, 123 minutes
B & W, English
Learning of the creation of a new type of rocket fuel, the Dictator of the Dark Planet descends to Earth to steal it.

Starring: Tatsuo Umemiya, Joji Oda, Hiroko Mine, Ushio Skashi, Takashi Kanda
(Click an actor's name to display their current appearances.)

Channel: 9481 MNSTR
May 16: 12:45PM

And this is better than Knight Rider ???

WRAY-TV Channel 30's digital transmitter (Channel 42) has been off the air for a couple of weeks. Maybe this explains why:


NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Media group E.W. Scripps Co. (SSP) Tuesday said it will shut down its loss-making Shop At Home unit after it failed to find a suitable buyer for the television and online retailer.

Scripps still plans to sell the five Shop At Home-affiliated television stations and is exploring programming alternatives once the Shop At Home broadcasts end. The Shop At Home stations are located in San Francisco, Boston, Cleveland, Raleigh-Durham, N.C., and Bridgeport, Conn., and reach about five million television households.

These channels are the remenants of VOOM, which was once a competitor to Dish and DirecTV. Yeah, nobody else heard of it either. Dish bought the remains, mostly for the transponder real estate, but still continues, for now, to offer the VOOM HD channels. So they are essentially "in house exclusives" for Dish and will remain so.
Yep, I knew that, I'm just dreaming of HD Utopia. :D Gotta love a good martial arts butt kickin or a monstar bash for fun though. :) Unlike most, I'm just not a diehard sports viewer. After highschool (during the birth of disco "Ugh") I prefered rocking and partying with friends rather than continuing spending my time as a sports follower, kinda lost touch with sports back then.

Yeegads! I thought the poster was joking. KungFuHD? MonstersHD? We must be at 570 channels and nothing on.
You gotta understand during my preteen years we had ABC, CBS, PBS and if the weather was kind NBC. Bruce Lee (still alive then) was most kids hero (not counting comic book superhero's). Saturday morning Martial Arts and Godzilla movies and Saturday Late Nite "Shock Theater Double Feature" were my weekly tv viewing hilights (not counting Giligans Island in the weekday afternoons). These types of shows stuck with me through life as favorites. :D

In an unrelated move, WTVD, also known as ABC 11, has agreed to produce a 10 p.m. newscast for WLFL beginning June 26. The newscast will run daily, including weekends.

You gotta understand during my preteen years we had ABC, CBS, PBS and if the weather was kind NBC. Bruce Lee (still alive then) was most kids hero (not counting comic book superhero's). Saturday morning Martial Arts and Godzilla movies and Saturday Late Nite "Shock Theater Double Feature" were my weekly tv viewing hilights (not counting Giligans Island in the weekday afternoons). These types of shows stuck with me through life as favorites. :D
Yeah, I remember. I'm a son of Zorro myself. But my tastes have changed in the decades since I was a teenager. Frank Zappa did a song about "Cheepniss" where you could see the hunk of 2x4 attached to the monster (and not quite off-screen) making him attack the other monster (who's got his own 2x4 from the other direction). That's what I see when all those old monster movies play - cheepniss. Recently I tried to watch - in glorious HD - "Forbidden Planet" and it was just not the same as I remembered.

Recently I tried to watch - in glorious HD - "Forbidden Planet" and it was just not the same as I remembered.

Have you watched an episode of the original "Star Trek" lately or perhaps "Lost in Space".

I think the only thing that ages worse than science fiction is milk.

Yeah, I remember. I'm a son of Zorro myself. But my tastes have changed in the decades since I was a teenager. Frank Zappa did a song about "Cheepniss" where you could see the hunk of 2x4 attached to the monster (and not quite off-screen) making him attack the other monster (who's got his own 2x4 from the other direction). That's what I see when all those old monster movies play - cheepniss. Recently I tried to watch - in glorious HD - "Forbidden Planet" and it was just not the same as I remembered.
I did watch the HD airing of "Forbidden Planet" and loved it. Own the dvd too. Call me crazy but I love the old classic B movies (sci-fi & horrors) along with their cheezy fx. I own several dvd's of old movies like that like "13 Ghosts", "City of the Dead", "Earth vs. the Flying Saucers", "It came from Outer Space", "Angry red Planet", "Black Sunday", "20 Million miles to Earth", "Creature from the Black Lagoon" and many more of their kind. I watch Star Trek marathons (Original series) each saturday on the G4tech channel. Just this morning I recorded "Planet of the Vampires" from 1965 off SHOHD. :D If anything of the kind comes on TCM or FXM I watch it. I'm a 10 year old sole in a 45 year old body. :)

SteveFitz1,

I have never seen a poster's query go un-answered. Everyone that shows up with a problem gets assistance.

Famous NC saying: "Surprise, Surprise Surprise"

I never got an answer on this. Not even a TS :)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7622954&&#post7622954

That is also my 2nd attempt at getting an answer.

Famous NC saying: "Surprise, Surprise Surprise"

I never got an answer on this. Not even a TS :)

I set my STB to output 720p, 480p and 480i only, without 1080i selected. From time-to-time (about 1 or 2 times per week) the box gets changed to 1080i only, and not the other 3 I have chosen.

That is also my 2nd attempt at getting an answer.
Are you possibly having momentary power interruptions or surges?

Famous NC saying: "Surprise, Surprise Surprise"

I never got an answer on this. Not even a TS :)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7622954&&#post7622954

That is also my 2nd attempt at getting an answer.

What box ??? Why do you not pass 1080i ??? I found that the scaler in the TV is generally better quality than the one in the set top box. Passing all native resolutions to the TV will usually give better PQ, even if the maximum resolution of the set is 720p (LCD), although you do have to suffer the "gear-shifting" in some sets.

Are there any other parameters of your box defaulting back to a factory preset. Could be a confused microprocessor. Reboot the box by doing a power down (pull the plug) for two minutes, then allowing a reboot sequence. If that doesn't solve the problem, either exchange the box, or switch to satellite. ;) ;) ;)

Famous NC saying: "Surprise, Surprise Surprise"

I never got an answer on this. Not even a TS :)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7622954&&#post7622954

That is also my 2nd attempt at getting an answer.

Ive never had that happen to mine. Just checked it and it is still set for 720p and 1080i. Is yours still doing it? How often?

What box ??? Why do you not pass 1080i ??? I found that the scaler in the TV is generally better quality than the one in the set top box. Passing all native resolutions to the TV will usually give better PQ, even if the maximum resolution of the set is 720p (LCD), although you do have to suffer the "gear-shifting" in some sets.

Are there any other parameters of your box defaulting back to a factory preset. Could be a confused microprocessor. Reboot the box by doing a power down (pull the plug) for two minutes, then allowing a reboot sequence. If that doesn't solve the problem, either exchange the box, or switch to satellite. ;) ;) ;)
Pepar: No Power interruptions (no blinking clocks set to 12:00 in the house, etc.).

posg: SA8300. I don't pass 1080i since my Sony is 768 resolution, and I agree with you about the TV's scaler (except for the maximum comment, but I'm no expert). I can't find any setting or parameter to govern this. All reboots have retained the user settings and not any type of 1080i default.

scsiraid: it happened several times, about every week to 10 days. I've been away since my post on 5/10 and when I returned on 5/15 there was no problem. However, I expect it will happen again.

posg: SA8300. I don't pass 1080i since my Sony is 768 resolution, and I agree with you about the TV's scaler (except for the maximum comment, but I'm no expert). I can't find any setting or parameter to govern this. All reboots have retained the user settings and not any type of 1080i default.

scsiraid: it happened several times, about every week to 10 days. I've been away since my post on 5/10 and when I returned on 5/15 there was no problem. However, I expect it will happen again.

My box used to reset itself to 1080i periodically as well. No power surges, etc. TWC sent my box a signal to correct a handshake issue and I have not had the problem since.

I would also recommend sending the TV the passthrough resolution. I used to own a GWII (768p). It handled 1080i much better than the box did.

it happened several times, about every week to 10 days. I've been away since my post on 5/10 and when I returned on 5/15 there was no problem. However, I expect it will happen again.
When did the latest firmware rev get pushed in Raleigh? During your absence?

posg: SA8300. I don't pass 1080i since my Sony is 768 resolution, and I agree with you about the TV's scaler (except for the maximum comment, but I'm no expert). I can't find any setting or parameter to govern this. All reboots have retained the user settings and not any type of 1080i default.


Even though your TV is 768, someone in the food chain, either the set top box or the TV must scale or convert a 1080i signal to 720p. (Actually I don't even know if a 720p is displayed truely natively). The TV, unless it is a no name off brand, certainly has a better scaler than the STB.

On my Sony, when switching channels, there is a "hiccup" when switching between channels of different native resolutions while the scaler "shifts". I just wonder if you passed ALL native resolution formats if your STB would still default back to 1080i. I assume 1080i output is the default mode.

When did the latest firmware rev get pushed in Raleigh? During your absence?

Our last firmware update was a couple of months ago.

.... I just wonder if you passed ALL native resolution formats if your STB would still default back to 1080i. I assume 1080i output is the default mode.

I was thinking the same and will give this a try (probably over the weekend and I'm home as the complaint dept for other occupants). I didn't select 1080i for the "hiccup" reason.

BTW, my AM routine is PC first, then watch a little TV. So guess what happened after my post this morning? Yep, the TV had been reset to 1080i automatically :)

I spent a little time looking for a setting (like Power Manager).