While the copy protection that will most certainly be present on any FW output from a cable STB will make the stream unusable with a PC (unless/until PCs have copy protection compliant FW ports :)), I *highly* doubt that you will short out your FW port on your PC.

TM

I searched and didn’t see this information posted anywhere, maybe it will save someone else time from trying this.

On Staten Island (TWC), I tested for any HD QAM channels with a LG LST-3510A.
It listed 45 channels after a scan none of these were HD.

Originally posted by DvST8
On Staten Island (TWC), I tested for any HD QAM channels with a LG LST-3510A. It listed 45 channels after a scan none of these were HD.
Interesting. So these were 45 QAM-delivered non-encrypted viewable SD channels? Last I counted, TWC/Manhattan was delivering ~100 analog channels with about 30 of them not sync-scrambled. -- John

anyone get a FW box yet??

Anyone know when we're getting ESPN HD? ;)

Will NYC TWC be using channel 709 this week to deliver CBS's Thurs/Fri coverage of the Master's golf (via USA/INHD)? In some U.S. locations, CBS HD stations will carry the Masters while their analog transmitter will carry their standard weekday programs. Seems weird if the network's flagship station couldn't get coverage (cable or OTA) into its own area. -- John

Originally posted by John Mason
Will NYC TWC be using channel 709 this week to deliver CBS's Thurs/Fri coverage of the Master's golf (via USA/INHD)? In some U.S. locations, CBS HD stations will carry the Masters while their analog transmitter will carry their standard weekday programs. Seems weird if the network's flagship station couldn't get coverage (cable or OTA) into its own area. -- John

That's really not a question for TWC - they just rebroadcast what WCBS feeds them. Right now, TitanTV does not have the HD broadcast listed for Thursday or Friday. But the NCAA first round games were not listed as HD and all the Kansas City games were broadcast on WCBS-DT as HD.

Originally posted by John Mason
Will NYC TWC be using channel 709 this week to deliver CBS's Thurs/Fri coverage of the Master's golf (via USA/INHD)? In some U.S. locations, CBS HD stations will carry the Masters while their analog transmitter will carry their standard weekday programs. Seems weird if the network's flagship station couldn't get coverage (cable or OTA) into its own area. -- John

Press release below says HD coverage will be April 8-11, which would include Thursday and Friday...

CBS SPORTS AND ARGENT MORTGAGE COMPANY TEAM UP TO BROADCAST PGA TOUR EVENTS FOR FIRST TIME IN HDTV

CBS Sports' Coverage of 13 PGA TOUR Tournaments Beginning With "MCI Heritage" to be Broadcast In High Definition Television Format Including 5.1 Digital Surround Sound

March 3, 2004 - CBS Sports announced today it will broadcast an unprecedented 13 PGA TOUR events, totaling 80 hours, beginning with the MCI HERITAGE from Hilton Head, S.C., on Saturday, April 17 and Sunday, April 18 (3:00-6:00 PM, ET, both days), in high definition television format. Once again, CBS Sports will broadcast the 2004 Masters® in HDTV on April 8-11. Argent Mortgage Mortgage Company, LLC. will sponsor the HDTV broadcasts of the PGA TOUR.

CBS Sports' PGA TOUR HDTV broadcasts will feature the highest definition television format -- 1080 lines of picture resolution -- and 5.1 digital surround sound. The unified productions for the Standard Definition and HD telecasts will feature the same announcers, camera angles, replays and graphics.

"We are very pleased to showcase PGA TOUR events for the first time in HDTV," said Sean McManus, President, CBS Sports. "With the clarity of HDTV pictures viewers will have a whole new experience from reading the greens to enjoying the beauty of the courses on the PGA TOUR."

"We are proud to help bring HDTV to viewers of the PGA TOUR broadcast on CBS Sports," said Wayne Lee, president of Argent Mortgage Company. "HDTV is revolutionizing broadcast entertainment just as Argent Mortgage is improving mortgage lending through innovations that serve independent mortgage brokers. We are very pleased to join with CBS Sports as it provides HDTV programming that enhances the enjoyment of golf."

Thanks for replies, ghostman, perrycampf. Previously, for USA/INHD-carried tennis matches, TWC fired up its 'special' channel 709 just long enough for Thurs/Fri coverage. So, if WCBS-DT insists on duplicating WCBS coverage (no Masters), and TWC won't run USA/CBSHD?/INHD, there's no Masters coverage locally via TWC or OTA. Not sure what other cable firms might do. As the CBS/Master's 'sticky-note' thread in the programming forum indicates, the decision for CBS HD stations to carry the Thus/Fri Masters varies from one city to another. -- John

After about an hour, most of the channels were not viewable anymore scrambled or breaking up a lot.
I'm using it for OTA only now.
Would have been nice to get the local HD channels that my antenna won’t get.




Originally posted by John Mason
Interesting. So these were 45 QAM-delivered non-encrypted viewable SD channels? Last I counted, TWC/Manhattan was delivering ~100 analog channels with about 30 of them not sync-scrambled. -- John

I'll be buying a HDTV this week. I have TWC in brooklyn. I'll be heading over to 23rd street to swap my box for one that supports HD. Is there one I should ask for? Do I have a choice? The TV I am getting can use either component or DVI. Does the box come with the connection cables for both or either?

Also whats with the lack of HD programming on TWC?! anyone know when more will be added? like ESPNHD and MSG in HD? Lack of HD channels with TWC is disappointing to say the least

Thanks,
Mobert :)

TWCNYC has crap HD programming and there doesn't seem to be anything coming along any time soon. Hopefully we'll be surprised but things aren't promising.

As for cable boxes, you'll probably get the Pioneer 5310 which is what I have. What TV are you getting? If it's the Zenith C32V37 you may find that component actually looks better than DVI.

Also, for those watching 1080i content over component, there are threads about a white line that occurs over dark images in Zenith and Sony HDTVs in the direct view forum. Anyone experience this? The big question is what's causing it: The TVs, the cable boxes, what?

Originally posted by Mobert
I'll be buying a HDTV this week. I have TWC in brooklyn. I'll be heading over to 23rd street to swap my box for one that supports HD. Is there one I should ask for? Do I have a choice? The TV I am getting can use either component or DVI. Does the box come with the connection cables for both or either?

Also whats with the lack of HD programming on TWC?! anyone know when more will be added? like ESPNHD and MSG in HD? Lack of HD channels with TWC is disappointing to say the least

Thanks,
Mobert :)

TWCNYC offers 2 HD STBs, the Scientific Atlanta 3100HD and the Pioneer 3510HD. I've never heard of anyone who's used both boxes who doesn't prefer the Pioneer. The SA box doesn't have a DVI output and delivers only a 1080i signal. The Pioneer has DVI and user-controlled variable output. Although there are isolated reports to the contrary, you'll probably not receive any cables from TWCNYC for either box.

Notwithstanding its sometimes aggressive HD sales promotions, the numbeer of HD channels carried by TWCNYC has not increased during the past year (it added one channel, Discovery HD, but dropped another one, WPIX-HD).

Just to chime in here, I received a component cable free when I picked up my Pioneer box. A pretty nice one, too.

Also just chiming in, about a month ago I got the Pace 550 box from TWC. They gave me the component cables with the STB. I'm in Staten Island.

i thought the component cable i recieved from 23rd st (with my Pio) was good, but when compared to my Audio Research cable, it was clearly inferior.

On another topic - has anyone requested and/or recieved a firewire enabled box?

I dunno... I think once RCN starts to offer the HD-DVR in Queens... i'll be jumping ship. :( ESPN-HD would be sweet just in time for Baseball season.

I went to the RCN website, doesn't seem I can get there service where I am in Brooklyn.

Originally posted by Mobert
I'll be buying a HDTV this week. I have TWC in brooklyn. I'll be heading over to 23rd street to swap my box for one that supports HD. Is there one I should ask for? Do I have a choice? The TV I am getting can use either component or DVI. Does the box come with the connection cables for both or either?

Also whats with the lack of HD programming on TWC?! anyone know when more will be added? like ESPNHD and MSG in HD? Lack of HD channels with TWC is disappointing to say the least

Thanks,
Mobert :) As far as I know, if you live in Brooklyn, you CANNOT go to the TWC store on 23rd st. to swap your box. I live in Brooklyn and tried swapping my SA for the Pioneer and was sorely disappointed after waiting for 1/2 hour. You have to go to the TWC center in Brooklyn or set up an appointment to have someone come to your place. Something about different signal heads, and that they aren't compatible. Regardless, they won't give you an HD box at 23rd if you live in Brooklyn.

doc

The Brooklyn one is around 27th st and 5th ave, right next to beautiful Greenwood Cemetery. The wait there (when I went) was about 30 seconds.

I just called to make sure going to 23rd street won't be a problem. Easier for me to get to being in downtown brooklyn. The lady said it shouldn't be, put me on hold for about 2 min to double check, came back and said it would be fine to exchange the box at 23rd street :)

Originally posted by Mobert
I just called to make sure going to 23rd street won't be a problem. Easier for me to get to being in downtown brooklyn. The lady said it shouldn't be, put me on hold for about 2 min to double check, came back and said it would be fine to exchange the box at 23rd street :) And that's what I was told by customer service, until they checked with a technician. I guess it's up to you whether you want to take a risk...

Originally posted by dkan24
On another topic - has anyone requested and/or recieved a firewire enabled box?

I have been talking to Bob Watson's office for 2 weeks now about getting a firewire box. They keep telling me they're waiting on the software to be debugged and it should be ready next week. How stupid can these people be to start working on the software just now when the boxes were supposed to be ready and available to the public on April 1? Who the hell plans these things?

They also told me I'm the only one that has requested a firewire box, so that may account for the lack of urgency on their part. I just can't believe no one else has requested one. C'mon people, don't you want to record HDTV? I would have thought that everyone on this thread would have requested one by now!

A minor diversion here.

Do you guys tip your cableman? Sometimes I was so furious that I have to wait around for them to fix little (TWC, including previous cablemen caused) problems, I refused to tip them, even though they seemed to be expecting one.

What are you personal tipping guidelines?

No way on tipping. I offer a glass of water, soda, use of the bathroom, but no money. I suppose if the guy went way above the call of duty, i.e., came to swap out the box, but re-wired the apartment, maybe, but that's a stretch in and of itself.

Back to HD related threads....

RE: HD Firewire box, other than buying an HD VCR, how would you record HD content. I'm just waiting on the HD-DVR.

Drew

As for those with the Pace box, does it have the feature to use the IR repeater so that you could hide the box out of view? I remember looking at a spec for this box a while back and it had that feature.

Drew

Originally posted by drew138
RE: HD Firewire box, other than buying an HD VCR, how would you record HD content. I'm just waiting on the HD-DVR.


Well, then you may be waiting for quite a while. A cable HD DVR for TWC NYC will not come out until probably the end of the year, and don't expect it to be bug-free. A DVHS VCR is a reliable way to timeshift AND archive HD content. I have a library of over 200 HD movies that I recorded with the Dish 5000 system and now, since Dish disabled it, the only cost-effective way to do it is with a firewire cable box.

Anyway, after I threatened to write a letter to the FCC, I got a call from Bob Watson himself (up to then I had only been dealing with his assistant), and he explained to me that the bugs were not limited to the firewire cable boxes but that the software needed to be loaded into the TWC system and it would affect all other digital cable boxes out there, not just the firewire ones. He said they expect to have the software ironed out after this weekend and I sould be able to have it installed by the end of next week. We'll see.

Drew,
The Pace box does have the IR repeater. Here's the link to the product sheet:
Pace 550 (http://www.pace.co.uk/products/prodinfo.asp?PID=DC550)

Exchanged my box at 23rd street, No prob at all :)

Originally posted by vruiz
Well, then you may be waiting for quite a while. A cable HD DVR for TWC NYC will not come out until probably the end of the year, and don't expect it to be bug-free. A DVHS VCR is a reliable way to timeshift AND archive HD content. I have a library of over 200 HD movies that I recorded with the Dish 5000 system and now, since Dish disabled it, the only cost-effective way to do it is with a firewire cable box.

Anyway, after I threatened to write a letter to the FCC, I got a call from Bob Watson himself (up to then I had only been dealing with his assistant), and he explained to me that the bugs were not limited to the firewire cable boxes but that the software needed to be loaded into the TWC system and it would affect all other digital cable boxes out there, not just the firewire ones. He said they expect to have the software ironed out after this weekend and I sould be able to have it installed by the end of next week. We'll see.

While you had him on the phone, did you ask how they're doing with respect to the resolution of thier bandwidth issues and the addition of INHD and HDNet? (I assume not, or you would have posted that news.)

Regarding HD-DVR: It's possible that a CableCard DVR could be released prior to TWCNYC making it's own HD-DVR available. I'm not saying it's likely, but it's possible. Sony is supposed to release a CableCard compatible DVR in mid to late fall.

I'm in Staten Island also and I've been using the Pace 550 for about a month now. I traded in my SA 3100 hopinh to get a Pioneer, only to find out they don't use the Pioneer here. I have been extremely happy with the Pace's performance. I have been looking for others on SI that are into HDTV that want to discuss it and Home Theater in general. If you're interested you can Private Message me and we can share thoughts on the subject.

Hey guys in new to this forum, can nayone explain why TWC in nyc sucks when it comes to hdtv. They have the worst lineup of hdtv ive seen yet. I live on the border of queens, i wish i was a couple hundred of feet over so i could get cablevision, their hdtv lineup blows away twc.

Enough is enough! There has to be something the HDTV community of TWCNYC can do to combat the lack of HD bandwidth. Don't know if any of you venture into other local threads, but its disgusting what channels we DON'T receive. We need to do something.

Vic,

I'll be getting the FW equipped box right after you get yours and let us know what all the bugs are :D That said, I second the earlier post that I may go the cablecard + Sony HD-PVR cable-card ready STB...

TM

Originally posted by vruiz
Well, then you may be waiting for quite a while. A cable HD DVR for TWC NYC will not come out until probably the end of the year, and don't expect it to be bug-free. A DVHS VCR is a reliable way to timeshift AND archive HD content. I have a library of over 200 HD movies that I recorded with the Dish 5000 system and now, since Dish disabled it, the only cost-effective way to do it is with a firewire cable box.

Anyway, after I threatened to write a letter to the FCC, I got a call from Bob Watson himself (up to then I had only been dealing with his assistant), and he explained to me that the bugs were not limited to the firewire cable boxes but that the software needed to be loaded into the TWC system and it would affect all other digital cable boxes out there, not just the firewire ones. He said they expect to have the software ironed out after this weekend and I sould be able to have it installed by the end of next week. We'll see.

Hey Vic, I've been told by TWC HDTV that I have to wait until June to get the FW box... They said something about it being backordered... any suggestion on how to get it sooner ? (like you did?)

Thanks!

Not sure if anyone has any better or in depth news, but I just spoke to TWCNYC and they're saying 'hopefully this summer'. sigh...

Originally posted by nickvlku
Hey Vic, I've been told by TWC HDTV that I have to wait until June to get the FW box... They said something about it being backordered... any suggestion on how to get it sooner ? (like you did?)

Call Bob Watson's office at (212) 598-7363. They gave me an appointment for this Friday to switch the box.

Whats the big deal with this new box?

Firewire output = recordable HD.

TM

Question about today's Fox announcement that up to 6 NFL games a week will be broadcast in HD. If the Giants are playing on Sunday but the game is not being broadcast in HD, will Ch. 705 show a different game from Ch. 5 (i.e. will Ch. 705 broadcast one of the HD games)?

So here's an update on my getting the firewire HD box... I talked to someone from Bob Watson's office and they told me they could send someone in early next week to do the box switch. However, they require that I have a firewire device at home already. I was like "Ok, well I'm getting a JVC DVHS deck in a week or two but for now I'm going to use my Powerbook and some Apple DVHS HD Archival software to record content" and they totally FREAKED OUT. :Sigh:

They mentioned something about this not being a part of the FCC aggreement, etc, etc (although the agreement left out actual appliactions of the port, just the port must be provided)

So what do I do now? I was thinking of a few things... one I can get a DVHS deck, call them over and if I don't like the DVHS deck return it but keep the box... or I can argue with them about this issue and push them on what the difference between a computer running recording software from a DVHS deck or PVR running recording software and mention the FCC ruling doesn't actually state what the port and can't be used for..) or what...

Argh! I just want to save HD and watch it later!!! :sigh:

Originally posted by nickvlku
So here's an update on my getting the firewire HD box... I talked to someone from Bob Watson's office and they told me they could send someone in early next week to do the box switch. However, they require that I have a firewire device at home already. I was like "Ok, well I'm getting a JVC DVHS deck in a week or two but for now I'm going to use my Powerbook and some Apple DVHS HD Archival software to record content" and they totally FREAKED OUT. :Sigh:

They mentioned something about this not being a part of the FCC aggreement, etc, etc (although the agreement left out actual appliactions of the port, just the port must be provided)

So what do I do now? I was thinking of a few things... one I can get a DVHS deck, call them over and if I don't like the DVHS deck return it but keep the box... or I can argue with them about this issue and push them on what the difference between a computer running recording software from a DVHS deck or PVR running recording software and mention the FCC ruling doesn't actually state what the port and can't be used for..) or what...

Argh! I just want to save HD and watch it later!!! :sigh:

What software are you talking about?

To my knowledge, the FireWire interconnects on HD devices are not carrying a standard computer data stream. They carry an encrypted signal. To my knowledge, not only would you need a CPU and chip set to decrypt the signal (and probably violate the DMCA) but you'd need another CPU to actually accept and record that signal. http://www.169time.com/ talks about this, but not on Macs.

FYI:

Time Warner Cable Plugs In HD DVRS


BY STEVE DONOHUE -- Multichannel News, 4/12/2004

Time Warner Cable has quietly started offering HDTV digital video recorders to subscribers in about 12 divisions, including some systems servicing customers in upstate New York, the Carolinas and Texas.

After a one-month beta test, Time Warner’s San Antonio, Texas, system began offering the Scientific-Atlanta 8000HD DVR to subscribers in February.

The system is charging $9.95 per month to lease the set-top, the same fee it charges subscribers for the S-A standard-definition DVR, said division vice president of marketing and product development Jeff Henry.

Time Warner didn’t disclose how many high-definition DVRs have been installed, but Henry said the San Antonio system counts about 15,000 HDTV customers.

Sales of HDTV programming packages continue to increase, and San Antonio is adding about 100 new HDTV customers daily, or about 3,000 per month.

“It’s the single fastest growing product we have,” Henry said.

Time Warner has displays featuring the HD DVRs at four local malls, and the equipment is also being offered through 10 of the system’s service centers in the San Antonio area, Henry said.

S-A’s 800HD set-top contains 160 gigabytes of memory, allowing subscribers to record 16 to 18 hours of high-definition content or about 80 hours of standard-definition programming.

The set-top vendor is also pitching MSOs a version of the set-top that contains 250 Gigabytes of memory capable of recording up to 28 hours of HDTV programs.

Originally posted by drew138
FYI:

Time Warner Cable Plugs In HD DVRS


BY STEVE DONOHUE -- Multichannel News, 4/12/2004

Time Warner Cable has quietly started offering HDTV digital video recorders to subscribers in about 12 divisions, including some systems servicing customers in upstate New York, the Carolinas and Texas.

.


Great news but who knows when we will see them let alone another HD channel. How ridiculous is it that these small markets get all the programming and equipment before NYC....and I don't want to hear about bandwith..enough excuses TWCNYC.

The bandwidth is what it is, whether you want to hear about it or not. The fact is that large systems such as TWCNYC have more demands on bandwidth than smaller systems, and greater costs in expanding it.

Originally posted by rgrossman
The bandwidth is what it is, whether you want to hear about it or not. The fact is that large systems such as TWCNYC have more demands on bandwidth than smaller systems, and greater costs in expanding it.

Well then step up and spend the money. Fortunately with Direct TV I'm able to supplement their pathetic HD lineup. If Cablevision was available as an alternate option I would dump TWCNYC in a heartbeat.

Did anyone hear anything about TWC removing the analog feeds of Channels 81-95? Someone I know supposedly received a letter saying if they wanted to continue watching those channels, they had to switch to digital, but they threw the letter away. I haven't heard anything about this. If true, more HD could be heading our way.

Anyone hear anything on this?

Originally posted by beatles6
Well then step up and spend the money.

I'm sure TWC would gladly accept your donation. Something in 7 figures would do it. Maybe.

Seriously, I think we are talking about wiring all of Manhattan (plus the rest of TWC's area). They've done it twice in the last 30-35 years, and I don't think it's going to be done again in the near future.

Originally posted by rgrossman
I'm sure TWC would gladly accept your donation. Something in 7 figures would do it. Maybe.

Seriously, I think we are talking about wiring all of Manhattan (plus the rest of TWC's area). They've done it twice in the last 30-35 years, and I don't think it's going to be done again in the near future.

You are so right....they certainly do accept donations but won't spend money to find a solution. My donation is over $160 every month.

What wiring?? The system has been upgraded to provide for HD, digital cable and high speed internet service. If they take your point of view it means TWCNYC does nothing and never adds another HD channel. They just sit back and continue to take our money while Time Warner's other systems around the country continue to enhance their HD content.

The problem is TWCNYC has no HD cable competitor. Complaints fall on deaf ears and their attitude is... too bad we're the only game in town so why should we spend money. If Cablevision was available and TWCNYC started losing customers because of their crap HD lineup you can bet they would find a solution to their bandwith problems.

that is so true! TWC just doesnt care. Its a shame, because i cant think of another region where there is more hd tvs than in the nyc area. Thank god, im able to put a dish up, and im officially vooming now. Im not a fan of satellite dishes, but i have no choice for now. If twc offered the hd lineup that cablevision does, i would drop VOOM, solely because i hate satellite but for now like i said i have no choice.

Originally posted by beatles6

What wiring?? The system has been upgraded to provide for HD, digital cable and high speed internet service. If they take your point of view it means TWCNYC does nothing and never adds another HD channel. They just sit back and continue to take our money while Time Warner's other systems around the country continue to enhance their HD content.


The system has been upgraded, as you say, to provide a certain amount of bandwidth--a maximum number of bits/second that can be sent down a fiber-optic cable. There is NOTHING TWC can do to increase this, other than to lay more cable. The only way more content can be sent is if someone comes up with a better compression algorithm.

While it may be a bad assumption, let us assume for the moment that all of TWC's systems have the same maximum bandwidth. So why does TWCNYC lag behind its sister systems in HD content? Because the bandwidth is being used for other purposes: more SD channels, VOD, internet access, etc. I doubt TWCNYC is ignorant of its lack of HD content. It has simply made the decision that they will make more money using the bandwidth for these other purposes.

NYC is different from most of the rest of the country (how many WalMarts do we have?) It's not the least bit surprising that we will end up with a different level of HD content than the rest of the country.

Originally posted by rgrossman
The system has been upgraded, as you say, to provide a certain amount of bandwidth--a maximum number of bits/second that can be sent down a fiber-optic cable. There is NOTHING TWC can do to increase this, other than to lay more cable. The only way more content can be sent is if someone comes up with a better compression algorithm.

While it may be a bad assumption, let us assume for the moment that all of TWC's systems have the same maximum bandwidth. So why does TWCNYC lag behind its sister systems in HD content? Because the bandwidth is being used for other purposes: more SD channels, VOD, internet access, etc. I doubt TWCNYC is ignorant of its lack of HD content. It has simply made the decision that they will make more money using the bandwidth for these other purposes.

NYC is different from most of the rest of the country (how many WalMarts do we have?) It's not the least bit surprising that we will end up with a different level of HD content than the rest of the country.

Your point is well made except for one thing. How does Cablevision find the bandwith to be able to provide the same SD channels, VOD and internet access and have 3 times the number of HD channels than TWCNYC does? Do they have a magic formula or is it possible that they spend money because they want to give their customers the most HD programming available?

NYC is different from the rest of the country...we are the greatest city in the USA. The expectation that we should have the best services available with respect to any industry, product or service just goes with the territory.

Maybe Cablevision allocates less bandwidth to VOD or internet access. Maybe they compress their channels more, i.e. they provide lower quality pictures.

Or maybe Cablevision laid higher capacity cable.

But whatever the reason, I very much doubt TWC is lying when it says it's using all its bandwidth.

Originally posted by beatles6
...is it possible that they spend money because they want to give their customers the most HD programming available?


It is possible, in fact probable, that Cablevision thinks it will make the most money by providing more HD programming. It is just as probable that TWCNYC thinks otherwise. Given that the two systems have different customer bases, and probably many other differences, it is not at all unreasonable that they came to two different conclusions.

But one thing is for certain. They are not competitors. TWCNYC does not care what Cablevision does, and repeated rants about how much more HD Cablevision provides accomplishes nothing.

Originally posted by rgrossman

But one thing is for certain. They are not competitors. TWCNYC does not care what Cablevision does, and repeated rants about how much more HD Cablevision provides accomplishes nothing.

Agreed...and therein lies the problem. Consumers should have the right of choice. We have that option for phone service but unfortunately for cable companies most of us do not. If they were competitors the consumer would benefit because each would be forced to provide the best pricing, programming and services available or face the prospect of losing customers and money. Thank goodness for Direct TV and Voom.

There's always the choice to move :)

TM

I finally got my 3250HD last Friday, and I've been trying to run it through its paces since then. I have a Samsung 165, a JVC 30K, and a Mits 2000 all daisy chained together. At first I plugged the 3250 to the front firewire jack of the 30K and it would not recognize it. The back firewire jack of the 30K goes to the 165, so I plugged the 3250 to the empty firewire jack in the back of the Mits and now it was reecognized by the JVC. The 30K now shows the 3250 on I-1, the Mits on I-2, and the 165 on I-3.

I have been able to record off all the Hd channels with no problems, except Discovery. There must be something wrong with the data stream on this channel because when I switch to it all I get is a black screen when I view it via the 30K on I-1. When I switch to the 3250's component output the channel is viewable with no problems. Sometimes this channel will cause the firewire output on the 3250 to lock up. When that happens no output is seen on the 3250's firewire for any other HD channel, and a reboot is necessary to restore the connection.

Something else that seems to happen at random is that when switching to an HD channel the 30K will flash the message "COPY RESTRICTED PROG, OUTPUT 480I VIDEO (302)", and the 30K will then downconvert the component output to 480i. This has happened about four times in the three days I've had the box. I have been unable to pinpoint the cause of this as it seems to happen without rhyme or reason and no warning, and a reboot is needed to restore full 1080i output via firewire. The component output is not affected by this glitch.

I have not been able to get the Mits 2000 to record from the 3250 at all. If I switch the Mits to D1 and press record I get the CP ERROR message after about 35 seconds. I'm only able to record with the 30K, but these tapes do play back on the Mits with no problems. I was also able to record on both decks at the same time, the 3250 to the JVC, and the 165 to the Mits, and the recordings came out fine. This was definitely a capability I was very much looking for.

Overall the box serves its purpose, but the software appears to still be somewhat flaky. The inability to control a DVHS deck from the box (like the 165 does) is a drawback, but not a major one.

Interesting Vic, thanks for the report. Have you tried running the fw to a PC or mac to see if that would work? It might shed some light on why you can't go straight to the Mits deck. Also, in terms of the gen'l flakiness, I wonder if the 5C is getting randomly turned on and off somehow? That might explain some of the other behavior you're seeing.

TM

No, I haven't tried going to a PC. I have to get a 6-pin to 6-pin FW cable for that. I may try to do that for testing purposes, but I'm really not that interested in recording to a PC.

Vic - let us know about the PC! I can't justify to myself buying another tape deck. The 8000HD won't be out for a while. I need to timeshift HD content!

Ok, the problems have gotten more severe after the first couple of days. Last night I could not record any shows in HD. Every time I turned on the box the JVC deck would display the dreaded COPY RESTRICTED PROG, OUTPUT 480I VIDEO (302) message, and no amount of reboots would get rid of it. This would happen on every HD channel, including the locals. The box would also sometmes lock up after a reboot if the firewire cable was connected to it, and it would not power up for a long time. When I unplugged the firewire cable it then rebooted quickly and properly.

I went through at least ten reboots after getting the COPY RESTRICTED message before I gave up trying to record for the night. Then when I turned the box back on at almost midnight everything was ok. Of course, by that time I had already missed The Sopranos, which was the only thing I really wanted to record :mad:

I let Bob Watson's office know about the problems and an engineer from TWC is supposed to call me back to talk about them. I'll let you guys know how that goes.

Hey guys,

Quick question. I have a pioneer BD-3500HD Box from TWC. I have the output formats set to 480i and 1080i. When I change from a SD channel to a HD one the picture shakes from side to side and there are lines along the top sometimes for just a second, but sometimes it can last up to 20 seconds before stabilizing.

Is this normal with the box or could this be a problem with my TV?

Often get that horizontal jitter with my CRT-based RPTV, too, when switching to 1080i. It's the circuits trying to sync to the nearly double 1080i frequency and shouldn't be a problem. -- John

Wonder in NYC will find the bandwidth to include this in NYC:

AOL, Time Warner Cable to launch cable channel
Reuters, 04.22.04, 11:45 AM ET



NEW YORK, April 21 (Reuters) - Sometimes, siblings do get along.

America Online, the world's largest Internet service provider, on Thursday said it has signed a marketing deal with corporate sibling Time Warner Cable that will lead to the creation of an AOL-related digital cable channel.

The new channel, My MC, will let digital cable customers in 16 markets watch music video programming on demand, by clicking a remote control.

Programming will come from a broad range of artists from Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group that was once only available on AOL's own high speed Internet service.

The service, which will be free to current digital cable subscribers, launches in May.

The deal appears to be another attempt to smooth once caustic relations between the online unit of Time Warner Inc. (nyse: TWX - news - people) and the rest of the company.

The announcement came just moments after AOL Chief Executive Jonathan Miller on Thursday morning laid out plans at a Time Warner board meeting to protect margins and raise profits at the online unit as it struggles to staunch subscriber defections to cheaper services.

In the past year and a half, AOL has also struck deals with several Time Inc. magazines to offer exclusive stories on the AOL service.

As part of the co-marketing deal, AOL will also offer some of its music videos, games and other programming on Time Warner Cable's Road Runner Web site to entice Time Warner's high speed Internet customers to also purchase access to the AOL for Broadband service.

AOL for Broadband, which does not provide a connection to the Internet, will also advertise Time Warner's Road Runner cable modem service to its subscribers.

Time Warner shares gained 13 cent to $16.92 in morning trade on the New York Stock Exchange.

Copyright 2004, Reuters News Service

Maybe these efforts will lead to more HD programming??? Probably not.

From multichannel.....

Time Warner Cable’s New York City division is already following Albany’s lead. High-end home-theater retailer Harvey Electronics has agreed to display Time Warner HDTV set-tops. And Time Warner is currently training Harvey installers, with the expectation that they’ll start installing HDTV set-tops in about a month’s time, according Time Warner Cable New York director of special markets Victor Cruz.

The New York division also recently opened a 50-by-30-foot kiosk at Queens Center Mall, called the “Time Warner Cable Living Room,” which contains HDTV sets, Road Runner displays and cell phones that shoppers can use for free.

Cruz says the second phase of the strategy at the mall is scheduled to kick off in October, when Time Warner will debut a store with 4,000 square feet, which will contain HDTV displays and a payment center. Cruz says Time Warner is modeling the location after its payment center on 23rd Street in Manhattan, which draws heavy traffic.

Wow. Cool catch Drew.

TM

I wonder if that means that TWC will now finally take HD seriously and add some new channels in the future (I ain't holdin' my breath).

Though I appreciate the general banter on this thread, there are really only two topics that I personally (and, im guessing, a few of you...) are interested in:

1.) when is the SA 8000HD PVR going to be available in the five boros,
2.) specific announcements of when new HD channels will be available in NYC.

are there any other threads that i can subscribe to, specifically for these topics? or, could we perhaps start new threads, specifically for announcements pertaining to them?

Related to the HD DVR being released, I found this interesting little piece of information in an article that I hadn't seen elsewhere on how TWC plans to charge for the HD DVR:

Time Warner Cable has started offering its own HD-PVR box for $6.99 a month (plus its standard $9.95 PVR fee and programming fees) in Austin. It offers local HD channels over cable (the unit can't record over-the-air broadcasts) except for KXAN, Austin's NBC affiliate. The Time Warner box can record about 20 hours of high-definition programs and can record two programs at once, including HD.

Drew

PS: I also found another article related to the Music VOD. It's not coming to NYC initially.

Originally posted by comport
Though I appreciate the general banter on this thread, there are really only two topics that I personally (and, im guessing, a few of you...) are interested in:

1.) when is the SA 8000HD PVR going to be available in the five boros,
2.) specific announcements of when new HD channels will be available in NYC.

are there any other threads that i can subscribe to, specifically for these topics? or, could we perhaps start new threads, specifically for announcements pertaining to them?

I'm not trying to be a wiseass, but if you start those threads, and request no posts unless someone has concrete information, you likely won't have any posts for months. The only information that we have (to my knowledge) on both subjects is that we'll have both the HD PVR and additional HD channels by the end of the year.

I have emailed Bob Watson a number of times on both subjects and have not received a response from him since December. I emailed him two weeks ago to make sure that TWCNYC has the bandwidth to handle FOX once it switches over to 720p in the fall, and I didn't receive a response to that question either. I can't imagine that they'd drop FOX, but it would have been nice to have received a response.

Originally posted by jergans
I'm not trying to be a wiseass, but if you start those threads, and request no posts unless someone has concrete information, you likely won't have any posts for months.



I had the same exact thought :)

TM

The idea we don't have ESPN HD is a travesty. I just moved to Manhattan had to give up my NFL Sunday Ticket. Right now - my Texas Rangers are playing the Red Sox in HD (I never get Ranger games) and I have to watch in stretched mode.

I wasn't any less happy to not see the Flyers /Leafs game on ESPN HD either!

Drew

I read the following this morning on another forum:

> many newer HD boxes will stretch the HD image to fill the screen. Most older HD boxes and most all televisions (which lock in full with HD) do not have the appropriate stretch function to remove the bars. <

Is there such a HD box available to TWC customers here in New York?
If not, when can we expect one?

Thank you.

Originally posted by Maurice2
I read the following this morning on another forum:

> many newer HD boxes will stretch the HD image to fill the screen. Most older HD boxes and most all televisions (which lock in full with HD) do not have the appropriate stretch function to remove the bars. <

Is there such a HD box available to TWC customers here in New York?
If not, when can we expect one?

Thank you.

I'm not quite sure what the person who wrote that post is trying to convey, but you can trust me when I say get the Pioneer 3510 from TWC NYC. The Pioneer will allow you to stretch component using the plasma's stretch function (Full/Just/Zoom) and the 3510 also includes its own stretching function (no just mode). Also, with the 3510, it will automatically accept 480i/480p/720p/1080i natively.

The SA 3150 cannot stretch, upconverts eveything to 1080i, has more dropouts than the Pio, and has this strange fuzzy washed out color haze.

Good luck asking for a Pio if you currently have the SA.

I have the Pioneer 3510HD and a Panasonic TH-42PWD6UY.
There is no way I can get a 4:3 program on a HD channel to fill the screen -- using either the STB remote or the Panasonic remote. Sidebars remain, no matter which setting I try.

Originally posted by Maurice2
I have the Pioneer 3510HD and a Panasonic TH-42PWD6UY.
There is no way I can get a 4:3 program on a HD channel to fill the screen -- using either the STB remote or the Panasonic remote. Sidebars remain, no matter which setting I try.
That's b/c a 4:3 program broadcast on an HD channel is actually broadcast in 16:9. The black bars are not being added by the TV or STB, but are inherent to the broadcast... so there is no extra space to stretch the picture in to.
Now, depending on the TV, you may be able to Zoom into the picture, but the STB treats the signal like the 16:9 broadcast it is.

I have a HDTV being delivered Saturday (can't wait), and while I currently have DVR I intend to get a Pioneer HD converter from TWC (to be hooked up with DVI). Is there any way for me to keep both boxes and use the HD box for watching HD and digital cable, and use the DVR box for recording non-HD programming on the same TV? I currently only have one cable line hooked up and don't want to lose picture quality. Thanks for any responses.

Originally posted by questec
I have a HDTV being delivered Saturday (can't wait), and while I currently have DVR I intend to get a Pioneer HD converter from TWC (to be hooked up with DVI). Is there any way for me to keep both boxes and use the HD box for watching HD and digital cable, and use the DVR box for recording non-HD programming on the same TV? I currently only have one cable line hooked up and don't want to lose picture quality. Thanks for any responses.

That's an easy one. Connect your incoming cable to the Pioneer's cable input jack. The STB has both RCA (video + audio) and S-Video (video) output jacks. Connect one of those to your DVR's input jacks (and add an audio feed from the STB to the DVR if you use the S-Video option). Then make separate connections from both the STB and the DVR to the HDTV's inputs. Here's a link to a diagram of the Pioneer's rear inputs and outputs:
Rear Jacks (http://www3.twcnyc.com/downloads/PioneerSelfInstallManual.pdf?GXHC_gx_session_id_=GXLiteSessi onID--1046907870404256711&GXHC_area=NM) After connecting the STB's DVI-out to the TV's DVI-in, you'll also need to run a parallel audio cable.

Thanks for the response Manatus. Will that work with the TWC DVR box that I currently have? I.e. can the non-HD Time Warner DVR STB with receive its input from the Pioneer HD non-DVR STB (that will also output directly to the TV)?

Just get a splitter. Make sure it is for digital cable.

I have my cable split twice. One split goes to cable modem. The other split goes to a splitter which then goes to the Pioneer HD box and the DVR.

Works nicely.

Problem with the last suggestion.... it turns your 7 dollar a month DVR service into a VCR. If you only have one cable device, just split the coax and send to both boxes. If you use a high quailty splitter you should be fine signal strength wise. Then use the s-vid input on your TV for your DVR and the DVI for the HD box. The only issue is that they use the same remote, so you could possibily screw up something you are recording on the DVR, so either block the front when not using it or make sure it is in standby. I use a similar setup as this, with the exception that my DVR is on a different TV. I use the coax out of the DVR into my HD set(which is on a different floor), and repeat the IR signal from one floor to another.

Originally posted by questec
Thanks for the response Manatus. Will that work with the TWC DVR box that I currently have? I.e. can the non-HD Time Warner DVR STB with receive its input from the Pioneer HD non-DVR STB (that will also output directly to the TV)?

My response would have been different if I'd known that your DVR is the TWC SA8000 (with a built-in tuner) not a DVR (like a Tivo) without a cable tuner. With that setup, just install a high-quality 2-way splitter on your incoming cable, route its outputs separately to the Pioneer STB and the DVR, and connect their respective outputs to your TV. That way, you'll be able to watch and record 2 different channels simultaneously. If and when TWCNYC ever makes a HD-DVR (like the SA8000HD) available, you'll be able to substitute it for both your Pio STB and current DVR.

Thanks for the help. I'll buy a Monster or some such splitter for now, and will wait and see if TWC ever rolls out a HD-DVR (and ESPN-HD, and MSG-HD, and WPIX-HD ...).

...and Cinemax HD, Starz HD, Fox HD when it comes out, InDemandHD1 & 2, and HDNet & HDNet Movies. The list goes on.

How sad is that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just called TWC. They won't give me a HD STB unless I swap my current one. The customer service rep said I can only have two boxes if they come to my home and install a second cable line on another TV.:mad:

Originally posted by questec
Just called TWC. They won't give me a HD STB unless I swap my current one. The customer service rep said I can only have two boxes if they come to my home and install a second cable line on another TV.:mad:

Never take at face value anything that a TWCNYC telephone CSR says, especially when HD is involved. Any logic behind a prohibition against having both a standard and a HD-STB for a single TV shouldn't extend to the combination of a SD-DVR and a HD-STB. For what it's worth, TWCNYC has been trying to persude me to add its SD-DVR to my setup almost as long as I've had one of its HD-STBs. Persist.

And, BTW, when you get beyond this impass, you don't need a Monster Cable splitter (even if such a thing exists). TWC supplies HD-compatible splitters gratis (I have 3 of them).

Originally posted by questec
Just called TWC. They won't give me a HD STB unless I swap my current one. The customer service rep said I can only have two boxes if they come to my home and install a second cable line on another TV.:mad: They'll give you both boxes, but you have to pay for both.

Sickman is correct, you will have to pay for both boxes, but you will also have to pay an additional charge to have any premium services replicated on the second box. This is only a factor if you have Shotime, HBO, or some other premium services. It's basically a scam that I don't know how they get away. I guess nobody complains!

The best way to go about getting both boxes is to have them swap out the DVR for the Pio HD Box, and then go back to pick up a second box (DVR) for your second TV. Be sure to call them and to note your account that your adding a second box. Alternatively, just unhook your DVR and put it in the drawer and just tell the guy when he shows up that the DVR cable box is in the bedroom and that you don't have cable on the HD set.

Good luck. Maybe we'll get the HD-DVR soon enough.

Drew

TWC is one of the large MSOs participating in an upgrade plan apparently aimed at gradually phasing out analog cable bands to provide more cable spectrum for other services. It's quite secretive, according to this CED article (http://www.cedmagazine.com/ced/2004/0504/05a.htm), so perhaps that accounts for all the failed inquiries to TWC officials here. -- John

anything to get us more bandwidth. let's hope it takes less than 5 years.

Thanks for the advice everyone who responded. I ended up just getting the Pioneer HD3510 box from TWC. I'll get a second DVR box for my bedroom non-HDTV.

Thus far, it seems like I get the best results when I use the DVI connection for the HD channels and composite cables for the other channels. With the composite cables the non-HD channels' picture seems both clearer and significantly larger. Is this consistent with other people's experience? My TV is a Sony KF-42WE610.

Also, is there a way to be sure the 3510HD is configured to automatically output channels in the same resolution they're input?

Thanks everyone.

Originally posted by questec
Also, is there a way to be sure the 3510HD is configured to automatically output channels in the same resolution they're input?

Thanks everyone.

Yes. Press the SETTINGS button on the TWC remote control, then the MORE SETTINGS button, and scroll down to OUTPUT FORMATS. Select which of the 4 possible formats (480i, 480p, 720p and 1080i) that you want the STB to pass through unaltered. Just be sure that the TV input you're using supports all the formats that you select on the STB (my second generation Samsung DLP HDTV, for example, doesn't support both 480i and 480p on any one of its 3 Component inputs).

Thanks Manatus. I'd already made the appropriate adjustments to Output Formats (for whatever reason that selection only appears on the Settings menu when a component rather than a DVI connection is used). When I used a component connection, I would manually change the resolution output by the set box for each channel by holding down the Diamond Key and pressing Volume Down key on the front of the STB and then selecting the resolution the channel was input at.

The procedure is set forth here:
http://www.pioneerbroadband.com/pdf/HD%20setup%20using%20Passport.pdf

What I'd like to know is whether there's a way to verify that if, for example, I'm watching a 720p broadcast, the STB is outputting the program in 720p rather than in 1080i, particularly when I'm using a DVI connection which doesn't permit use of the "Diamond/Volume Down procedure."

I spoke to both TWC and Pioneer customer support. My understanding now is that TWC has not set up the 3510HD to automatically output at the same resolution that each channel is input at. The user needs to do that manually for each channel through the procedure I described above, which is only possible with a component rather than a DVI connection. The default is a 1080i output.

It also seems that the best results will be achieved using a composite or S-video connection for SD channels and a component connection for HD channels. I'm not entirely sure why that's the case.

Is the Pioneer HD3510 available in Staten Island? I have heard of a Pacer box available on Staten Island, is that as good as the Pioneer?

To update:

It appears that I was misinformed about the 3510HD, and that it does output in the appropriate formats using DVI or component connections. However, I continue to get a better SD picture using composite than either DVI or component.

You have inspired me to try S-Video. The SD channels look real bad on my Zenith HDTV. I have to crank contrast and brightness like mad and even then it look crummy.

Originally posted by questec
I continue to get a better SD picture using composite than either DVI or component.
Me too. However, I found out that by routing an S-video connection from the Pioneer STB to my Panasonic DVD recorder DMR-E30 and from the E30 to the TV (Panny PWD6UY) via component, I get a still better PQ for SD programs than thru composite. It seems that the E30 somehow cleans up the picture while converting it to component format. Perhaps someone can explain better than me what actually happens to the signal. In any case, I always watch SD via the DVD connection.

Any word on if TNT-HD will be on TWC in NYC in time for the western finals?

It is unlikely there will be any channel additions in the near future, and I doubt TNT-HD is at the top of the list.

Why is it that TWC is adding channels to other markets but not to NYC?

Originally posted by Mobert
Why is it that TWC is adding channels to other markets but not to NYC?

Because TWCNYC doesn't have enough bandwidth to add any HD channels. This is discussed many places in this thread (I know the thread is long...). Last we heard, they plan to add stations (HDNet, INHD, probably TNTHD) by the end of the year. We heard that in December 2003.

On this subject, I'm more than a bit frustrated with TWCNYC right now. I've emailed Bob Watson on a number of occasions asking simple questions and haven't heard a single peep of a reply since December. Even though it's unlikely we'd get any answers we want to hear right now, I think it would be nice to hear SOMETHING. With the complete lack of information from TWCNYC regarding future HD plans (other than the amorphous, "We'll add channels and give you the HDDVR box by the end of the year...after most other TWC affiliates have them"), I'd switch to D* or RCN in a second if I had the choice in my apartment.

Has ANYONE heard ANYTHING from TWCNYC lately?

In addition to what jergans said, be aware that the various TWC cable systems are operated quite independently.

This really sucks! I would switch to VOOM or DTV in a second if I could, but my building won't allow them to install it. This leaves me stuck with TWC, so that leaves me with crappy HD selection.

I doubt anything will change until they start losing a LOT of people to providers that DO have a good selection of HD in there programming. It always comes down to the all mighty dollar. I guess nothing will change til they start losing some. Those of you that can change, hit em where it hurts!!!

Mobert, I'm afraid that just won't work. The bandwidth capacity of the cables running under the streets of NYC cannot be increased for any amount of money--and no one will invest the money (and years) that it would take to run new cables.

TWCNYC has a maximum physical bandwidth. Period. It's not going to change, unless someone comes up with a better type of laser or something to transmit higher density signals on the existing cables. And even if it were available tomorrow it would take a while to install.

The only thing TWCNYC can change is how this bandwidth is used. As cited in the post above (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3785451#post3785451) there is an effort to convert the analog TV transmissions (a real bandwidth hog) to digital. That apparently will take years.

Otherwise, all they can do right now to add HD channels is to delete other services. This is primarily a financial question (though PR and political considerations will be factors).

Despite the way it may seem on this forum, relatively few homes in the TWCNYC area have HD-capable sets (people with small apartments are less likely to get a big TV). I wouldn't be surprised if it's still under 10%. I very much doubt it's 20%. Not a big target for TWCNYC to go after. Of course this will increase as time goes on, but this also will take years.

When you add in the factor that so few of us can switch to another provider, I don't see TWCNYC making any big moves to significantly increase HD service for a while. I think their stategy will be to wait until they have enough potential HD customers who will pay for an HD package.

I doubt they'll add more than a channel or two by the end of the year, no matter how many of us switch.

Why is it that other cable providers like Comcast and RCN..etc in the NYC area have the bandwith in there lines to add channels but TWC-NYC does not? Was it just VERY poor planning for the future on TWC's part compared to these other companies?

RCN doesn't cover nearly as much territory as TWC, which greatly reduces its costs. TWC is required by its city franchise to cover every block of its territory, whether it's profitable or not. (BTW, I heard RCN is one step from bankruptcy court--though it probably will survive.)

I don't know about Comcast. Do they have to run their cables underground, the way TWCNYC does (much more expensive)? Do they allocate as much bandwidth to high speed internet access, VOD, or premium foreign language channels (a big moneymaker in NYC)?

Maybe TWC has a different customer base than Comcast (i.e. more HDTV owners). Maybe it was just poor planning. But whatever the reason, I doubt that it's going to change much in the next few months.

Originally posted by Mobert
This really sucks! I would switch to VOOM or DTV in a second if I could, but my building won't allow them to install it. This leaves me stuck with TWC, so that leaves me with crappy HD selection.

I doubt anything will change until they start losing a LOT of people to providers that DO have a good selection of HD in there programming. It always comes down to the all mighty dollar. I guess nothing will change til they start losing some. Those of you that can change, hit em where it hurts!!!

i don't think your building can prevent you from getting it - you should look into that if you want voom. the research i did indicated that my co-op couldn't prevent me from installing satellite if i wish to

Regarding VOOM, does anyone have any opinions on it ? I am hearing more and more about it and being just as frustrated with TWC as most other people I am seriously considering VOOM.


Thanks.

I dropped TWC for VOOM and I tell you I have never been so happy. Voom is ten times better. Also, I had Roadrunner and they upped my from 45 to 60 bucks a mth for that because I had no cable service in the house. I was pissed about that but I didnt want to be stuck with Staten Island Time Warner Cable with CBS, Nbc, Abc, Fox, DiscoveryHD and HBO if I wanted and Shotime....thats it. Its a bad HD lineup. Now with VOOM I have the base package, it comes to 3 bucks less a mth then I was paying for TWC. I get the 10 CinHD ch's (they arent for me but sometimes I watch them), MonstersHD( which is alot of fun...today they are showing Tex Chainsaw Masss, Halloween 4 and 5, and Friday the 13th), plus they have a News ch in HD, and a concert ch in HD...and others. With the base package they give you DiscHD and ESPNHD, which is a great deal. With the OTA ANT Im getting CBS, ABC, FOX, UPN, and PBS...Im having no luck at getting NBC...but you know what...I dont care. TWC of SI is in a sorry state when it comes to HD. HAve they added ESPNHD yet? I have been watching the NHL in HD on ESPN...which is great. All for 3 bucks lower than I was paying.
As for the RR going up to 60 bucks....there is a way around that. I found out that Earthlink which is rated about the same in service as RR ...uses TWC's line for their service. So, I went down to the TWC store to switch , and I got Earthlink Internet service for 44.95 a mth...whether you have cable service or not, its 44.95....same as RR. Right nown they are running a deal for 29.99 for the first 6 mths if you are a new Earthlink customer. Service is the same as RR....TWC robbed from me for years...now Im glad there are other options for me to turn to. Goodbye TW forever.

Originally posted by shk718
i don't think your building can prevent you from getting it - you should look into that if you want voom. the research i did indicated that my co-op couldn't prevent me from installing satellite if i wish to

If you have a private terrace with a view of the satellite(s), then the FCC rules say you have the right to mount a dish on it (up to a certain size, I forget exactly what). But the space must be under your "exclusive control." So you do not have the right to put a dish on the roof (unless you happen to have exclusive control over that).

There are plenty of posts on this subject in other AVS areas.

Caught some interviews this week on C-SPAN's coverage of cable-TV presidents at the cable convention. It might be replayed this weekend. Several of them mentioned plans to gradually shed their analog bands as a method of providing bandwidth, as outlined in a recent article I sublinked (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3785451#post3785451). And one mentioned that the upcoming switched-video (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3355113#post3355113) technology or optical Ethernets would let cable viewers watch any channel in the world. I'd settle for just a half-dozen more HDs via NYC's TWC, for starters. -- John

I just got my 34XBR600 and the Pioneer box from TWC in NYC. I have two things to post, first is a statement. The woman who helped me seemed to know a little bit about HD, had the presence to ask me which box I preferred, and when I told her I wanted the one with a DVI out she knew exactly what I wanted. I was shocked, having read this forum for a couple of weeks. She told me that the HD DVR was coming at the end of the summer. Probably stringing me along, but anyway, she said it.

Now, a question: Isn't there some sort of legislation in place to roll out HD broadcast? Or does that pertain to OTA braodcast only or something? Just wishing that the FCC would work for us for once in this administration.

Time Warner Cable And TNT To Offer High Drama in High Definition; Broadest Range of Dramatic HDTV Programming to Include Series, Sports, Movies and Originals

STAMFORD, Conn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 18, 2004--Time Warner Cable
announced today it will roll out the high definition feed of Turner
Network Television (TNT) beginning with the network's coverage of the
first NBA Western Conference Finals playoff game on May 21. TNT is one
of television's leaders in delivery of adults 18-49 and 25-54 in prime
and total day. The 24/7 high definition presentation of the TNT East
Coast feed will also offer Time Warner Cable customers a broad range
of dramatic programming in HDTV format, including series, sports,
movies and TNT Originals.
"TNT's collection of live sports, originals and top rated content
is even more compelling when viewed in high-def," said Time Warner
Cable Chief Marketing Officer Chuck Ellis. "TNT in HD makes a perfect
complement to our ever expanding value-added HDTV package - which is
available to our customers at no additional cost. Time Warner Cable
continues to deliver on its promise to provide consumers with the best
in choice and value for high definition programming."
TNT in HD is broadcast in 1080i 24 hours a day with all content in
native HD or up-converted to HD, including commercials. TNT in HD will
use Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound for all programming and
promotional elements. In addition, TNT in HD will present all of its
programming, including promotional content and commercials, in 16:9
wide-screen, giving viewers a consistent viewing experience.
"We are pleased that our partners at Time Warner Cable will be
bringing high drama in high definition to its customers," said Andrew
T. Heller, president of domestic distribution for TBS, Inc.
Among TNT's other highly anticipated programs is the limited
original series The Grid, starring Dylan McDermott (The Practice,
Wonderland) and Julianna Margulies (ER, Evelyn), set to premiere in
summer 2004. The series from TNT and the BBC, produced in conjunction
with Fox Television Studios and Carnival Films, explores both sides of
the escalating war on terror. In February 2003, TBS, Inc. tapped into
the HDTV market by offering TNT's coverage of the NBA All-Star Game in
high-definition and repeated that success with the 2004 NBA All-Star
Game.
Time Warner Cable's value-added tier includes HD programming from
ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, WB, UPN, NBA-TV, Discovery HD Theater, and select
Fox Sports Net regional networks, at no additional charge. Time Warner
Cable also offers an HD destination tier which consists of programming
that is uniquely packaged and not simulcast on a standard definition
channel. This programming package is competitively priced and includes
HDNet, HDNet Movies, iNDemand's INHD and INHD2. HBO-HDTV and Showtime
HD are also available to Time Warner Cable customers who subscribe to
the underlying standard network. Specific high definition programming
lineups vary by market depending on local broadcast agreements.
Time Warner Cable owns and manages cable systems serving 10.9
million subscribers in 27 states, which include some of the most
technologically advanced, best-clustered cable systems in the country
with more than 75% of the Company's customers in systems of 300,000
subscribers or more. Utilizing a fully upgraded advanced cable network
and a steadfast commitment to providing consumers with choice, value
and world-class customer service, Time Warner Cable is an industry
leader in delivering advanced products and services such as video on
demand, high definition television, high-speed data, wireless home
networking and digital video recorders. Time Warner Cable is a company
of Time Warner Inc.
Turner Network Television (TNT), the destination for drama, is a
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. 24-hour advertiser-supported service.
TNT, an industry leader in delivery of adults 18-49 and 25-54 in prime
and total day, is cable's only network combining award-winning
original films, with upcoming fare including Salem's Lot, adapted from
the Stephen King novel, and the Johnson & Johnson Spotlight
Presentation The Wool Cap; the Original film Evel Knievel; highly
anticipated limited original series, including The Grid and a Steven
Spielberg 12-hour series, Into the West (working title); powerful
one-hour dramas, such as Law & Order, ER, NYPD Blue, The X-Files,
Charmed, Judging Amy and Angel, with Without a Trace joining in fall
of 2004; broadcast premieres; and championship sports coverage
including NASCAR, the PGA and the British Open and the NBA.
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (TBS, Inc.), a Time Warner
company, is a major producer of news and entertainment product around
the world and a leading provider of programming for the television
industry.


CONTACT: Time Warner Cable
Keith Cocozza, 203-351-2039
keith.cocozza@twcable.com
or
Turner Network Sales
Leigh Majors, 404-827-3907
leigh.majors@turner.com

Fairly useless information, Pace1313. TWCNYC does not have the bandwidth for it, or any other HD channel, at the present time.

Thanks for the post pace1313. Very useful.

I found it interesting that TNT will be part of the their basic tier of HDTV programming, the majority of which we presently get in NYC. I woudn't be surprised if we see this on the system in NYC as it might be a small concession to not having ESPN-HD.

I don't understand why some people are so convinced that TWCNYC has no bandwidth available. To think that they are operating with absolutely no margin on bandwidth seems absurd to me. Only more absurd would be to think that a statement to consumers on available bandwidth is the be all end all. I would agree that to offer the advanced HDTV tier and the 4-6 channels it offers might be over the limit of available bandwidth, but I'm sure there is room to add a channel if it makes business sense.

I guess we will find out on Friday...."Time Warner Cable announced today it will roll out the high definition feed of Turner Network Television (TNT) beginning with the network's coverage of the first NBA Western Conference Finals playoff game on May 21"

Drew

You guys are a riot :)

TM

If Tony will allow me to steal his favorite line... You could always move. :D

Seriously, hope we get this one. Anything new would be good. I got the no up front costs Voom mailer recently and I was tempted to call, but threw it out in hopes that we will see some movement before the year is out. The last straw will be if they pull some nonsense once Fox goes to 720p this fall. If for some reason they tell us they have no bandwidth for that , it's all over for me and TWC-NYC.

I'm with you pciav if they don't add Fox in 720p this fall. Goodbye TWC-NYC and hello satellite.

Drew -

It won't be a "small concession to not having ESPN-HD" as far as Time Warner is concerned - no concession on its part. Please remember that TNT and TWC are owned by the same company; and TNT's advertising rates are based on how many people watch its programming. Having its programming available in the New York market is mandate to maximize revenue. TWC will only move ahead if those actions serves its and parent's own purposes. Eventually they will have to show the City and Washington that they are opening their "limited bandwidth to channel not owned by Time Warner. Subscribers must keep on TWC's corporate backs and demand ESPN-HD. But don't hold your breath.

Gary

You are correct Gary.

We all need to keep on TWC's back to deliver more HDTV programming. Even more so in NYC. Unfortuantley, as pointed out by others, HDTV isn't really driving significant additional revenue.

A jump to Voom or RCN might actually be the best alternative in NYC if you are looking for additional HDTV programming, if those are even options based on where you live.

Drew

Originally posted by drew138


I don't understand why some people are so convinced that TWCNYC has no bandwidth available. To think that they are operating with absolutely no margin on bandwidth seems absurd to me. Only more absurd would be to think that a statement to consumers on available bandwidth is the be all end all. I would agree that to offer the advanced HDTV tier and the 4-6 channels it offers might be over the limit of available bandwidth, but I'm sure there is room to add a channel if it makes business sense.



I heard DIRECTLY from Bob Watson that they have no available bandwidth. I know that a statement to consumers is not the be-all and end-all, but Bob Watson has been honest with everyone who deals with him (even if we don't like what he tells us). Although it seems like a lame reason, can you think of another realistic reason why TWCNYC would not roll out channels (INHD, HDNET and possibly TNTHD) that every other TWC affiliate receives?

In principle I agree with you. Very poor planning on TWCNYC's part (notwithstanding the unique problems they face in NYC). But as much as I dislike TWCNYC, I don't think that they are being dishonest with us here.

Here's the email I received in December:



From: Watson, Robert [mailto:bob.watson@twcable.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 4:52 PM
To: __________
Subject: RE: HDNet and INHD


We hope to carry as much HD programming as our resources allow, and
recently added Discovery HD. Time Warner Cable has agreements allowing
it to distribute INHD 1 & 2 and HD Net and HD Movies, however in our NYC area systems we are currently out of available bandwidth to carry these services. We expect to resolve our bandwidth issues next year and plan to add the services when the bandwidth becomes available. Time Warner Cable's corporate programming department is also negotiating with ESPN to for rights to carry ESPNHD. Which we ultimately plan to add.
In the interim, I hope you are happy with the HD service you are
receiving at no additional charge, including local broadcasters such as
ABC, NBC, CBS and channel 13 in HD and the digital feeds from Fox, WNJN
and Kids Thirteen.

Thanks for your feedback.
Happy Holidays,
Bob Watson
VP Programming & New Business Development
Time Warner Cable of NY & NJ.

SO I've been thinking more about the issues here. Maybe the thing TWCNYC has to do is start charging for an HD package? I mean, of course first there has to be enough channels for there to BE an HD package, but if if the issue is revenue, maybe a small incremental kick to the bottom line would help sort this out.

In other words, yes there are tons of demands on bandwidth here in the world's capital (non-english channels, VOD, whatever), but HD doesn't really stand a chance if it continues to be free, does it? IIRC many of the other TWC's around the country do in fact charge for an HD package (something like $5?), so if TWCNYC does the same, then I doubt many HD fans would balk at paying this *if* the desired channels were included (the usual suspects we don't get now)...

Anyway, just rambling, and yes, Phil, feel free to borrow my line anytime :)

TM

Originally posted by anthonymoody
SO I've been thinking more about the issues here. Maybe the thing TWCNYC has to do is start charging for an HD package?

I have no doubt that when it is feasible, technically, legally and financially, there will be a premium HD package that they'll charge for. But I don't think it will be any time soon. Maybe next year. Maybe.

I believe TWCNYC when it says it currently has no bandwidth available. I have not heard of any technical advances that would increase the bandwidth in the next few months. The only way more HD channels can be added is to discontinue some other service--and TWCNYC is not going to do this until they think they can make more money with HD. I don't think that's going to happen until there are significantly more HD sets in the homes in its area (what may be happening elsewhere is irrelevent).

There are legal considerations also: some channels must be carried by FCC regulation; some must be carried by the terms of the city franchise; and I think a lot of the rest must be carried, for some period, under contracts TWC has signed.

Don't be too disappointed if nothing changes Friday. Or even six months from Friday.

Isn't this forum just for new HD channels and the release date of the HD-DVR ;)

Originally posted by anthonymoody
SO I've been thinking more about the issues here. Maybe the thing TWCNYC has to do is start charging for an HD package? I mean, of course first there has to be enough channels for there to BE an HD package, but if if the issue is revenue, maybe a small incremental kick to the bottom line would help sort this out.

In other words, yes there are tons of demands on bandwidth here in the world's capital (non-english channels, VOD, whatever), but HD doesn't really stand a chance if it continues to be free, does it? IIRC many of the other TWC's around the country do in fact charge for an HD package (something like $5?), so if TWCNYC does the same, then I doubt many HD fans would balk at paying this *if* the desired channels were included (the usual suspects we don't get now)...

Anyway, just rambling, and yes, Phil, feel free to borrow my line anytime :)

TM

TWC does charge for the HD package (or at least INHD and HDNet) in areas in which it offers INHD and HDNet.

I just received the following email in reply to a request I sent about TNT-HD:

Thank you for your recent message to Time Warner Cable regarding programming on our cable lineup.

At this time the channel you have mentioned TNT-HD is not part of our cable lineup.

We want you to know we share your view of TNT-HD as a quality service and can assure you that suggestions such as yours are not going unnoticed.

If you are requesting a new channel please send a letter with your location and channel request to:

Robert Watson
VP Programming, New Business Development
Time Warner Cable
120 E. 23rd Street 9th Floor
New York, NY 10010


Please refer to our website @ www.twcnyc.com for any future plans, services and news updates.

If you have any further questions, please contact us at support@twcnyc.com or call our 24 hour Customer Support XPRESSLINE at 212-674-9100 or 718-358-0900.

Sincerely,

Doreen Feldman
Customer SupportI take three things away from this response:
[list=1] Bob Watson is indeed the person to talk to w/r/t new channels and related issues.
That being said, why would TWC even be accepting requests for new channels if there were no available bandwidth? Wouldn't their response be "there's no way we can add more channels at this time," rather than "contact Bob Watson with your request"?
We should start a letter-writing campaign to Bob Watson with our requests for new HD channels. He might be able to get something done if we show him there's some number of consumers demanding more HD programming. I'm sure Rich's response will be that there's nothing that can be done, but it can't hurt to try.
[/list=1]Just my $.02,
dpc

Originally posted by perrycampf
That being said, why would TWC even be accepting requests for new channels if there were no available bandwidth? Wouldn't their response be "there's no way we can add more channels at this time," rather than "contact Bob Watson with your request"?


What you got was a canned form letter. A low-level clerk just plugged in "TNT-HD" and sent it off to you. It is quite possible "Doreen Feldman" isn't even a real person.

Obviously you've never worked in public relations. You try very hard never to tell a customer "no." You tell them: maybe, in the future, we'll keep your suggestion on file, thanks for your input-- exactly the form letter response you got from TWCNYC.

It does NOT mean they will be adding any channels any time soon.

If you want to start a letter-writing campaign, go right ahead. It won't hurt. But I doubt it will help anything. I'm sure Bob Watson is well aware of TWCNYC's lack of HD channels, and how much some people want that improved. I'm also sure he knows how many potential customers for HD service there are in the TWCNYC area.

You know, Rich, I don't appreciate your condescending tone or your pessimistic attitude. Perhaps I have worked in customer relations, and my policy has always been to be honest with a customer and always deliver more than I've promised. If I start by saying there's no way any additional channels can be added, and then we add one, the customer will be much happier than if I build up (according to you) false hope that I can add an entire HD tier and then let the customer down by only adding one channel. I also know from experience that the lower level's first answer is often "no," and only when you push does it become "maybe, we'll have to ask my supervisor." Why would the initial response be to contact Bob Watson if there really was no point? Do you think he has the time to devote to requests if there really were no hope, or are you willing to acknowledge the possibility that there are decisions to be made about how to allocate available resources and that those decisions are made through customer feeback? If the status quo were truly the only option, then there would be no point in providing that feedback to Bob Watson.

You don't know anything more than anyone else on this forum, and your consistent attitude that you do is unfortunate and contrary to the entire paradigm of the forum. We all appreciate your information, and we appreciate your reaching out to Bob Watson back in December, but please don't pass off your opinion for fact.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to organize a letter-writing campaign or pursue other avenues of consumer action. I just hope your negative attitude doesn't dissuade others who have the time and inclination to promote change that is in the best interests of the NY HD community and TWC customers in general.

Originally posted by perrycampf
Why would the initial response be to contact Bob Watson if there really was no point?

Because this is a form letter that is used for all requests for additional channels. My guess is it, or something like it, has been used for years. The idea is to make the customer think he or she has real input.

Watson himself has said "no." Why can't you, and the other people clogging up this thread with useless rants about TWCNYC's lack of HD service, believe him?

Do you think he has the time to devote to requests if there really were no hope, or are you willing to acknowledge the possibility that there are decisions to be made about how to allocate available resources and that those decisions are made through customer feeback? If the status quo were truly the only option, then there would be no point in providing that feedback to Bob Watson.

You think Bob Watson personally looks at customer requests for new channels? Maybe he does. Maybe a staff peson looks at them. I doubt he spends any significant amount of time tending to them.

You don't know anything more than anyone else on this forum, and your consistent attitude that you do is unfortunate and contrary to the entire paradigm of the forum. We all appreciate your information, and we appreciate your reaching out to Bob Watson back in December, but please don't pass off your opinion for fact.

You have confused me with someone else. I have never contacted Bob Watson. You are correct that I don't know anything more than anyone else here. I thought I did a pretty good job of stating that my observations and analysis of what Watson said, and what TWCNYC has (not) done, are opinions. In the future I'll try harder.

But I do think my analysis is correct, and well-grounded--I have been a customer of TWCNYC and its predecessors since 1975, and I have plenty of experience with how it operates.

I understand your frustration. I too want more HD service from TWCNYC. But I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I agree with Perry...

"...I just hope your negative attitude doesn't dissuade others who have the time and inclination to promote change that is in the best interests of the NY HD community and TWC customers in general."

Too much negativity Rich. Don't be so quick to prick our balloons.

I’ve written e mails and mailed letters to Bob Watson-- he never responded-- and now I’ll still write him again.

By the way, I’m seriously looking into joining VOOM this weekend. The only problem that I see with VOOM is no YES. Anthony- you understand my dilemma.

Larry

Ok I can agree that being negative is usually not the best way to go, but for those of us who can not get VOOM or some other service and are stuck with TWC-NYC what exactly do we have to be positive about?

Here's my problem: The complete radio silence from TWCNYC basically since December regarding our two biggest HD-related concerns: new stations and HD-DVR (I know that TWCNYC's site says by year-end, but originally it said first quarter 2004). What we need is someone at TWCNYC who is able to respond to HD-related questions.

We may not get responses we like, but what frustrates me (and I think most of us) is the complete lack of any information coming out of TWCNYC. I've emailed Bob Watson one, simple question on more than occasion: Is TWCNYC still planning to add additional HD stations by year-end as you previously indicated? I haven't received a response.

My plan now is to email the head of Time Warner Cable (nationally, not TWCNYC). His name is Glenn Britt. His email address is glenn.britt@twcable.com.

I'm not going to demand new HD stations which TWCNYC may not be able to provide at this time. I'm not going to demand an HD-DVR, because my understanding is that the HD-DVR for systems using Pioneer headends (like TWCNYC) is not available yet.

I am going to ask him for the name of someone who can answer some very simple questions regarding TWCNYC's HD programming plans. We currently do not receive a number of channels (five, once TNT HD is online) that every other TWC system receives. Is it still the plan to add these stations (and hopefully others) by year end?

Hopefully that will get a reply. When I have programming questions, I contact Bob Watson, as I'm explicitly told to do, and yet I hear nothing. I'll keep moving up the ladder.

I'll let everyone know how it goes.

If you ask me it feels almost like discrimination against the NYC market compared to the others. All other TWC markets get decent HD programming, get the benefits of all the deals that TWC has inked with other companies but not the NYC market.

We do get to pay the same price for less options, maybe higher prices. Wouldn't be surprised if we pay more for less but can not be sure of that. TWC-NYC charges are quite high, I know that.

Originally posted by Mobert
If you ask me it feels almost like discrimination against the NYC market compared to the others. All other TWC markets get decent HD programming, get the benefits of all the deals that TWC has inked with other companies but not the NYC market.



Mobert - I don't see how this is discrimination. I really don't believe there is a conspiracy either.

I agree with Jergans approach. It is only bothersome that we do not get straight answers, or any answers at all. I do not think that a TWC NYC rep has to join these forums. But honest responses from someone who is knowledgable would be nice.

The ironic and rather sad part about all of this is that we do not have any other choice. Telling us the truth about the HD-DVR would not make a single difference to any of us whether it was coming tomorrow or December. We would all still get it the day it comes out and accept it. I will only give TWC credit for giving it to us for free (which is rather ridiculous!)

Originally posted by jergans
Here's my problem: The complete radio silence from TWCNYC basically since December regarding our two biggest HD-related concerns: new stations and HD-DVR (I know that TWCNYC's site says by year-end, but originally it said first quarter 2004). What we need is someone at TWCNYC who is able to respond to HD-related questions.

We may not get responses we like, but what frustrates me (and I think most of us) is the complete lack of any information coming out of TWCNYC. I've emailed Bob Watson one, simple question on more than occasion: Is TWCNYC still planning to add additional HD stations by year-end as you previously indicated? I haven't received a response.



The silence is quite typical of TWCNYC (as I've said, I've been observing them and their predecessors for nearly 29 years). They are extremely reluctant to give out any hard information until they actually roll out a product (or a new channel).

In fact, Bob Watson's December statement is extremely untypical of TWCNYC--which is why I think it is so significant.

As for the question of discrimination, it's really something else: NYC is very seldom the leading edge of any nationwide company's product rollout. They start with the smaller markets, where the costs are smaller (and the media attention is smaller: a product that bombs in Boise doesn't make nearly as much noise as one that fails in NYC). When something is successful in smaller cities, then they bring it to NYC--maybe: we still don't have a Walmart in the city, no Sears in Manhattan, and the first Home Depot won't be in Manhattan until later this year. It's not discrimination--it's the realisation that costs and risks are much greater here.

People call me a pessimist. I prefer to think of myself as a realist. If that makes me a balloon-pricker, so be it. I'd much rather be wrong, and pleasantly surprised, but I really think I'm right.

Other cable companies ARE and have been adding HD channels for some time now in the NYC market. So the idea of TWC-NYC not wanting to make a wrong move by adding HD channels or a HD package for $X per month is not one that holds much water at all.

I wish I could look at it in the light that you guys do. I don't like being angry about this but it's hard not to be when you hear about other cable companies and other TWC markets adding and planning to add new channels when we are stuck here in New York City, the biggest best city in america if not the world with nothing but the bare basics at best.

As for the HD-DVR that they may give us at no cost "sometime" in the "near" future... it's a joke. Why? Simple It's suppose to be able to record HD. HD is what we are lacking in a big way. I'd much rather TWC's efforts went toward adding more HD channels. Giving us the same that they have given most of there other major markets already and what other cable companies have given customers in NYC already.

The HD DVR will come with an added surcharge to your bill.

You'll have more luck sending an e-mail to the NYTimes than Glenn Britt of TWC if you are trying to get more information on HD channels in NYC. A little article in the Times noting how the largest cable franchise in the back yard of the corporate HQ in Stamford, CT is having its lunch eaten by Cablevision, Voom, RCN and many others when it comes to HD materials, and how none of the local sports teams can be seen in HD in the NYC market would go a long way towards putting pressure on those who make decisions on the HD lineup in NYC.

Rich, I agree that you are taking a realistic approach on TWCNYC. You do tend to be a little put-downish though at attempts to keep the lame board alive with a little bit of fun "chatter" about new channels and general griping.

Question to the group, which is more important to you? New channels, or the HD-DVR? I'd rather have the HD-DVR personally. There is plenty of HD content on TV, I'm just never around to catch it. If I could tee up all my HD programming I'd stop complaining for a long time. More channels for me is really just an excuse to watch more programming. Plus I get the added benefit of having a DVR on my main television so I can DVR SD programs as well!! I have two friends who currently have some crazy rigged up tivo/HD STB and DVR/HD STB. It's crazy. Every time I want to watch something on DVR I have to go into my bedroom.

Drew

Originally posted by drew138
The HD DVR will come with an added surcharge to your bill.

You'll have more luck sending an e-mail to the NYTimes than Glenn Britt of TWC if you are trying to get more information on HD channels in NYC. A little article in the Times noting how the largest cable franchise in the back yard of the corporate HQ in Stamford, CT is having its lunch eaten by Cablevision, Voom, RCN and many others when it comes to HD materials, and how none of the local sports teams can be seen in HD in the NYC market would go a long way towards putting pressure on those who make decisions on the HD lineup in NYC.

Rich, I agree that you are taking a realistic approach on TWCNYC. You do tend to be a little put-downish though at attempts to keep the lame board alive with a little bit of fun "chatter" about new channels and general griping.

Question to the group, which is more important to you? New channels, or the HD-DVR? I'd rather have the HD-DVR personally. There is plenty of HD content on TV, I'm just never around to catch it. If I could tee up all my HD programming I'd stop complaining for a long time. More channels for me is really just an excuse to watch more programming. Plus I get the added benefit of having a DVR on my main television so I can DVR SD programs as well!! I have two friends who currently have some crazy rigged up tivo/HD STB and DVR/HD STB. It's crazy. Every time I want to watch something on DVR I have to go into my bedroom.

Drew

A couple things:

1. I've emailed Glenn Britt before, about incredibly poor customer service (unrelated to HD). I was having real problems with TWCNYC about a couple things and I could not get the situation remedied through TWCNYC. I emailed Mr. Britt (and cc'd his assistant) and received a phone call from a TWC rep within 15 minutes. He may not respond to my HD-related questions, but it doesn't hurt to try.

2. I'd rather have HD programming because we KNOW that Sony (and likely others) will have CableCARD ready HD-DVRs available in the early fall. If TWCNYC doesn't deliver an HD-DVR by then, I won't mind paying for one from Sony or Tivo.

In any event, I have my regular SD Tivo hooked up to my HD box and HD set and it works like a charm. You can have a DVR on your main TV, it just can't be the TWCNYC DVR (unless you want to have two cable boxes hooked up to your TV).

No way. Personally, I would much rather be able to watch the Mets or more movies and sports in HD, than be able to record a bunch of crap network programming that I would never watch anyway. Don't get me wrong, I've been a Tivo enthusiast for years now, but I would definitely still put content over control at this point, particularly when it comes to HD.

For everyone's information, I moved to NYC from Charlotte in February and was a early adopter of of HDTV on Time Warner's Charlotte system. Not only are they $20 cheaper per month than TWC-NYC but they offered more HD channels; InDemandHD & InDemandHD2, HDNet and HDNet Movies, as well as the FOX affiliate in 480p (which was great for Fox Widescreen football games).

Additionally and while it may be an uninformative post, the Charlotte Time Warner office regularly reads and replies to their local forum.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3819791#post3819791

Why is there such a difference in Customer Service between one of the most bland cities in the world to one of the greatest?

I agree, we need some press attention before anything happens. Does anyone know the technology journalist at the Times? I suggest we write him/her with our comments about TWC-NYC HD content.

Hey this has gotten lively again. Great! :)

A few comments...

First, the recent response from Bob Watson's office is definitely different than the one we got for a long time (in form, not content particularly). It certainly may simply be a new form, but it's definitely different.

Second, no Yes on VOOM? NO WAY FOR ME!!! :)

Third, re: product rollouts, the reason that NYC is never used as a test market is b/c it is an extremely poor predictor of widespread (i.e. national) success - or failure for that matter. I happen to know a little bit about this b/c of a family member who is in charge of product development at one of the largest consumer goods company in the world. They use places like "everywhere, USA" to test market stuff, and roll out from there. All that said, I don't think that has anything to do with why we don't have more HD channels :).

Fourth, I agree that negativity is not the answer, certainly not in this thread, though I'll admit I participate with that tone on occassion (who me? :D).

Fifth, I'll write to BW's office (again) as well as that senior guy. Couldn't hurt.

Sixth, what's wrong with Jeter?

Seventh, I would not discount the value of a TWC person on this board. Another market has a participant (I think South Carolina?) and she's really helpful.

Eighth, I would prefer more channels *and* an HD PVR :)

Ninth, John Dvorak actually reads his email so we could always try to start with him if we can't get Mossberg or the guys at the Times. Dvorak doesn't live here of course, but his pulpit is there nonetheless.

TM

So, here's my proposed email to Glenn Britt.

Mr. Britt:

I am writing with hopes that you will be able to provide some information on Time Warner Cable's plans with respect to HDTV programming in New York City. I have emailed Bob Watson, VP of Programming for Time Warner Cable of NY and NJ a number of times and have not received a response since December. At that time, I was told that TWCNYC was unable to add any additional HD stations due to a lack of available bandwidth in the TWCNYC system. He informed me that TWCNYC would have their bandwidth issues resolved by the end of 2004.

I realize we're not even halfway through 2004, but as the months go on and other TWC affiliates are adding exciting stations like the two INHD stations, the two HDNet stations and TNTHD, it is very frustrating for those of us living in the greatest city in the world to be stuck with such meager HD offerings.

Time Warner Cable seems to be proud of its commitment to HDTV. I see commercials on TWCNYC stations quite frequently, touting the advantages of HD and encouraging viewers to call TWCNYC to get hooked up with an HD box. Actions speak louder than words, however, and TWCNYC's actual commitment to HD is quite abysmal. Few customer service reps who are able to answer even the most rudimentary HD-related questions, the lack of an HD-DVR, which was originally promised (on the TWCNYC website) in the first quarter of 2004 and the slimmest menu of HD programming choices of any TWC affiliate.

Just to be clear, I'm not asking anyone to throw open the curtain and expose all of TWC's future plans. I'm just wondering when TWCNYC will catch up with the rest of the nation with regard to HD programming. I'm not writing because I don't like the answers I receive from TWCNYC. I write because I'm not receiving any answers at all.

Thank you for your time,

Looks great! I only note one typo/grammatical nitpick:

Originally posted by jergans
So, here's my proposed email to Glenn Britt.

Mr. Britt:

***
Actions speak louder than words, however, and TWCNYC's actual commitment to HD is quite abysmal. Few customer service reps who are able to answer even the most rudimentary HD-related questions, the lack of an HD-DVR, which was originally promised (on the TWCNYC website) in the first quarter of 2004 and the slimmest menu of HD programming choices of any TWC affiliate.
***
There should be a colon (I think) between the two sentences so that it reads "Actions speak louder than words, however, and TWCNYC's actual commitment to HD is quite abysmal: few customer service reps who are able to answer even the most rudimentary HD-related questions, the lack of an HD-DVR, which was originally promised (on the TWCNYC website) in the first quarter of 2004 and the slimmest menu of HD programming choices of any TWC affiliate."

You might also think about including a contrast to competitors in addition to the contrast you draw with other TWC affiliates. I realize that Dish, DirecTV, Cablevision, etc., might not be an option for some TWCNYC customers, but they are for some and what they are doing w/r/t HD programming and services is certainly of concern to Glenn Britt.

Fire away!!

dpc

Well done, Jergans. Here are a couple of thoughts for what they're worth. (1) I haven't noticed any TWCNYC ads for many months touting its HD services and have assumed that the company wisely decided not to waste its advertising budget promoting one of the weakest of its products. (2) If this were my letter, I'd snail-mail it (and probably also email a copy). (3) I'd also cc: it to a couple of corporate higher-ups: Richard D. Parsons, Chairman and CEO, and Don Logan, Chairman Media and Communications Groups, both at Time Warner Inc., One Time Warner Center, NY, NY 10019. (4) If you think it would be useful, I imagine that a number of participants in this thread would be willing to let you add their names and addresses to the letter.

1. If anyone wants me to include their names/email addresses, please send me a PM. I'd like to send the email by the end of the day, so the sooner you respond, the better!

2. I know that Glenn Britt responds to emails, which I why I chose that route rather than snail mail. But you have a good point. It doesn't hurt to send a hard copy as well.

3. On an unrelated note, if you have any interest in Home Theater at all, you should stop by the Hilton on 6th Ave. between 53d and 54th to check out the Home Entertainment Expo, going on through Sunday. I work on 53d and 5th, so I stopped by during lunch. Lots of cool stuff, including new Samsung and Sony HDTVs (and other stuff) that's not yet on the market.

Very nice Jergans! I agree with Manatus, email it but also send a snal mail of it out. It can't hurt. Also it wouldn't hurt to shoot it off to a few other higher ups.

If you need names to add to it count me in. Just let me know.

Keep us posted and thanks for your efforts. :)

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Would it make sense to also include a link to this thread?… perhaps to give these folks a first hand glance at our frustrations.

Larry

I sent the email with some minor changes, including a link to this discussion. If you sent me your name and email address, I included it in the letter and cc'd you on the email.

I'll keep you posted on any response I receive.

I am a talent agent located in NYC and I represent a very influential recording artist. I sent an e-mail to Mr. Britt yesterday and stated my frustration with the capital of the world NYC having so few HD networks even though we probably have the most HD TV's. I also stated it is embarrassing that all the other TWC franchises have more HD than we do and listed all the HD stations I would love, ie. ESPN, INHD1&2, HDNet & HDNet Movies, MSG, FSNY, TNT and Bravo. I received an e-mail back today. Paraphrasing Mr Britt said he knows our system is full because we have more broadcast and foreign stations than other TWC markets. He said he is a BIG believer in HD and generally buys as much HD programming as each market can hold. He then said he would forward my E-mail to Howard Scarfarc who runs the NYC system and he will furthur answer my questions.

I then almost immediately received a second E-mail from Bob Watson. He said he was forwarded my e-mail and his pertinent info is that TWC-NYC plans to add many of the networks I mentioned but they must add new bandwidth. He said "work is underway now" to achieve this, and he "anticipates" that by the fourth 1/4 of this year they will add HD programming. He threw in that the HD DVR is scheduled for "late summer" I thanked him for his response and then asked how do they increase bandwidth. Hopefully he will get back to me as quickly as he did today.

Man it really sucked watching the Lakers T-Wolves game on TNT knowing most places had it in HD :(

Bob Watson answered my second e-mail about how bandwidth is to be added. He said "It's not a technology deficit but rather an increase in infrastructure complexity and number of channels. With over 400 channels of video and audio only services in our NYC system and an extremely busy VOD service, we run the most intricate and active cable system known.

To make room we have to move a large group of customers to newer equipment, upgrade hardware and software. Add a few business issues and it's late 2004. But we feel the timing is pretty solid."

I've been having a weird problem with my cable box: Sometimes the channel won't change for a long time and then suddenly change a bunch from all the button pushing. Also, channels are coming in all black today. Anyone else experiencing that? I "rebooted" the box (unplugged it) but it's still happening. What's up?

BelB64, that's very positive news that you received a response. Thanks for taking the time to post the notes.

Hopefully the remainder of 2004 will see us get back to a more equal footing with other TWC markets with regards to HD programming. You earlier post from several months ago Fall 2004 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3102118#post3102118) indicated a slew of new channels in the fall.

Hopefully I wont be watching too much TV during the summer anyway!!

Thanks again,

Drew

Just checking the cable and finding that practically all channels are black - no pic, no sound. What's up? Damnit Time Warner is growing old!


ETA: Rebooted again and it seems to be working now. Bleh.

Originally posted by BelB64
Bob Watson answered my second e-mail about how bandwidth is to be added...
To make room we have to move a large group of customers to newer equipment, upgrade hardware and software. Add a few business issues and it's late 2004. But we feel the timing is pretty solid."

I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like they're going to replace the bandwidth-hogging analog channels, or at least some of them, with digital ones. People who have been getting the basic, unscrambled channels without a box are now going to need one.

Originally posted by rgrossman
I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like they're going to replace the bandwidth-hogging analog channels, or at least some of them, with digital ones. People who have been getting the basic, unscrambled channels without a box are now going to need one.

This is exactly what they should be doing, and I've said so before. But we should keep in mind that very few (30-40 at most) channels are unscrambled. Even Standard service customers with no premiums need a box. So they would just go from having an analog box to a digital box. The handful of unscrambled channels (broadcast, shopping, etc.) could stay analog and Basic service customers wouldn't have to get a box.

This is absolutely the way to go, and if you interpreted this correctly, then kudos to TWC for doing what makes sense.

A high percentage of customers still have analog boxes - maybe 50% or higher. It could take years and a lot of money to switch them all.

Pace has a cheap box that will take the digital signals and convert them to analog. If they gave these to all the customers with analog boxes, it would be a lot cheaper than giving them new digital boxes.

But this goes against 2 things TWC has to be looking at:

1. Giving customers another box in addition to the box they already have (for every box in their house) will certainly angry and inconvienance many customers.

2. They will still not be able to take advantge of digital value-add services like VOD, PPV, and DVR which make TWC money.

Who knows what they are going to do. My bet is that it takes a lot longer than by the end of 2004. While Mets and Knicks in HD is nice, I am looking forward to the HD-DVR more than I am the new channels. I hate DVD on my projector after being spoiled with HD. But not being able to timeshift movies really makes me mad!!

Has anybody noticed that Time Warner Cable
is now an AVS forum sponsor.
That must mean they are reading this thread...!

More encouraging news! I just receieved ANOTHER response to the e-mails I mentioned earlier. This one answered my question as to whether Cablevision would ever offer us MSG-HD and FSNY-HD or would they keep them exclusively. The answer I got was that it's on hold now as they negotiate to renew the entire MSG and FSNY package. "Assuming all goes well in the negotiations" we would get all the HD feeds on the INHD station, pre-empting their regular show of that day." Very good news for Mets and Rangers fans.

Does anybody else get TONS of digital garbage on channels like MTV and VH1? It's driving me crazy and is almost enough to make me go back to analog cable.

Mine's fine. Sounds like you might have a low signal level. Are you using a DVR?

If you mean "Real World, Road Rules, and other mindless, non-music video" garbage, then yes, we all get that! Otherwise the signal quality and PQ on my set are fine. The digital cable signal is much more susceptible to degradation and shows those flaws in pixelation on the TV set. Call TWC and have them come out and check/fix the signal quality.

BelB64, thanks for the continued updates. Those are good answers and also indicate that there is a commitment to bring us INHD at some point soon.

Drew

I'm not using a DVR. I'm running the cable from the wall through a Monster Power HTS9000 or whatever (with clean power) and into the Pio box. Sometimes the crazy colored pixellation is so bad you just can't watch. I agree that the programming on MTV is lame but it's been a good example of bad digital cable for a while now. I dunno. It's driving me crazy. Maybe I will have them come out.

I don't think you should run digital cable through the monster power unit. Try it direct and see what happens. If it is still bad, call TWC - i believe its a free service visit.

We do not get INHD, so I don't see how thats an option. Even if we did what would happen if both FSNY-HD and MSG-HD had something on at the same time?

Originally posted by Mobert
We do not get INHD, so I don't see how thats an option. Even if we did what would happen if both FSNY-HD and MSG-HD had something on at the same time?

I agree. It seems like this is a bad solution. Of course, I'll be happy to get anything at this point.

But we really should have them all as seperate channels. What if there is a Knick game on MSG, and another basketball game on INHD?

Whatever, we probably won't see any of this until early next year. JUST GIVE ME THE HD DVR!!!!!

Originally posted by dkan24
I don't think you should run digital cable through the monster power unit. Try it direct and see what happens. If it is still bad, call TWC - i believe its a free service visit.

Can do!

Originally posted by dkan24
I don't think you should run digital cable through the monster power unit. Try it direct and see what happens. If it is still bad, call TWC - i believe its a free service visit.

Really?

Is this true? Since day one I’ve had my cable plugged in through that monster unit. Is that wrong?

I don’t have the HD cables going through the monster unit nor do I have them going through my DENON receiver. Those go directly into the TV.


Larry

I have heard that digital cable should not go through anything (amplifiers, filters, cleaners, spliters).

There are newer splitters and such that are specifically desgined for digital cable. Most older things are not.

Originally posted by dkan24
I have heard that digital cable should not go through anything (amplifiers, filters, cleaners, spliters).

There are newer splitters and such that are specifically desgined for digital cable. Most older things are not.

That's a good point. I have it running through a splitter too but I doubt it's a "digital" cable splitter. I looked over the regular and digital ones and decided to just get the regular one (it was cheap). I wonder if that's causing it? Anyone know for sure that there's a difference?

I have my cable going through 2 digital splitters:

The first split goes to the cable modem and another splitter. The second split goes to the DVR and HD box. My reception, VOD, HD, and DVR recordings are all perfect, and cable modem is very fast.

I believe any splitter you use for digital cable should be rated over 1ghz. Check the splitter, it should be marked something like 5-1100Mhz. Make sure the second number is > 1000Mhz or > 1Ghz.

My cable also goes through a splitter which I bought at Radio Shack and I believe is just your basic splitter, nothing special. My analog and HD TV reception as well as my cable modem speed is fine.

My understanding has been that INHD1&2, with HDNet and HDMovies will be added as soon as the bandwidth increases. This happened in the other TWC systems. I would love both FSNY-HD and MSG-HD but there will only be very few times when the Mets and Rangers or Knicks are home the same day. These are the only programs that are HD on these stations. TWC-of NYC probably feels most NY'ers rather see a NYC team than an out of town team if there is limited bandwidth. I certainly agree.

My understanding has been that INHD1&2, with HDNet and HDMovies will be added as soon as the bandwidth increases

It looks like that won't happen anytime soon. Not any time in the next couple of years from what people are saying would need to happen to free some bandwith up. :mad:

Originally posted by dkan24
I have heard that digital cable should not go through anything (amplifiers, filters, cleaners, spliters).

There are newer splitters and such that are specifically desgined for digital cable. Most older things are not.

I have the same splitters that TWCNYC (or possibly the company that existed before TWCNYC with the turn knob cable box) installed in my apartment way before my memory begins (i am 22). There are 4 splitters right into each other and I never have a problem with my tv and my modem speed is great. I don't think it really matters. Then again I think that monster clean power thingie is a overpriced waste. I may be wrong.

- JB

Originally posted by mrkaos
I have the same splitters that TWCNYC (or possibly the company that existed before TWCNYC with the turn knob cable box) installed in my apartment way before my memory begins (i am 22). There are 4 splitters right into each other and I never have a problem with my tv and my modem speed is great. I don't think it really matters. Then again I think that monster clean power thingie is a overpriced waste. I may be wrong.

- JB

I bought a used Monster Power HTS-3000 on Audiogon for $100 2 years ago. I figured that I might as well have some decent protection for all my equipment. I did not expect to get better audio or video.

After plugging everything in, the difference in audio was obvious. Everything sounded better.

I still don;t believe that digital cable should go through it. I guess we will all find out the answer soon enough.

Mobert-Whoever said it will take a few years to increase bandwidth is wrong unless Bob Watson of TWC-NYC is a complete liar. If you read my response from him a few days ago, he believes that by the end of THIS year we will have INHD1&2 and HDNet and HDNet Movies and hopefully we then get the MSG and FSNY on INHD when the contract for all of MSG and FSNY is complete. He assured me that this time frame is very doable.

That is him providing hope. There is no technological breakthru at the moment to change the amount of bandwidth. I am currently working with another major cable company trying to design networks to provide bandwidth. The only way they will get more hd this year is if they remove some other service.

- jb

Here is an interesting HD related extract from Cablevision's investor conference call by the new COO talking abuot ability to broadcast HD content. About mid-way through they talk about deploying freed up bandwidth in the most economic way possible. In our case, TWC-NYC has more economicly beneficial ways to deploy bandwidth. I'd like to know more about what he means when he says "switched video technology will be feasible commercially"; Maybe John Mason can translate ;)

RICHARD BILOTTI, MORGAN STANLEY: Good Morning. You have taken the lead in terms of HDTV both on satellite and on cable, and I'm intrigued to understand, it seems to be raging throughout the industry, on a 750 system, such as the systems you built in New York, in the beginning stages of the roll-out, how many H.D. channels can you actually physically accommodate on those systems today before you run out of bandwidth? And then looking at it one more level, if you wanted to go an even greater number of channels, Tom, you all have looked at a lot of different strategies, where do you come out on all digital versus an 860 upgrade, versus a node split as a way to add bandwidth?

TOM RUTLEDGE: Rich, the math is fairly simple. You can compress today about three to one, and so it's a typical 750 cable system could carry about 330, all high-definition channels if we wanted to make it all digital, all HD. It's 450, 750 channels on a 750, right? 115.

WILLIAM BELL: So 300, you're right.

TOM RUTLEDGE: Well, whatever, it's large capacity.

RICHARD BILOTTI: But given that you have existing customers and obviously assume to be getting in a lot have you configured today what is practical in terms of the number that can be carried? How many six megahertz slots can you turnover to HD?

TOM RUTLEDGE: That's an evolving question. As our penetration of digital increases, which it's doing rapidly. We can take back spectrum by taking services that have historically been delivered in analog and converting them to digital. Pay TV and pay-per-view are the first services that are being converted that way, and we are rapidly doing that conversion.

As that spectrum gets freed up, that's available for high-definition. It's available for video on demand. So we can see how the marketplace dictates usage and allocate the spectrum the way that maximizes our utility to the customer. And is most economic. It looks like that by the ends of this year that switched video technology will be feasible commercially, which means that essentially we have an unlimited channel capacity for linear services, meaning traditional broadcast services.

Because we can use the plant that we've built, which is small node, already split node in essence relative to the rest of the industry, and use that capacity to deliver essentially unlimited products from around the world in a linear form on demand. And the initial products that we want to launch in that form would be low penetrated or low use services. But as the network continues to evolve we can do any kind of product in that form.

So 750 is sufficient plant for the foreseeable future. There's no need to go to 860 and do an upgrade. We can manage this plant going forward in a completely customer satisfactory way and have unlimited services without having to put additional capital into the infrastructure.

RICHARD BILOTTI: That's exactly the topic I was interested in. Thank you

Originally posted by mrkaos
That is him providing hope. There is no technological breakthru at the moment to change the amount of bandwidth. I am currently working with another major cable company trying to design networks to provide bandwidth. The only way they will get more hd this year is if they remove some other service.

Noted the big splash of multiple full-page Cisco ads and Matt Richtel's NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/25/technology/25cisco.html) yesterday about new router hardware. Was speculating then, since I've read NYC TWC uses some types of Cisco routers, if these new extremely fast routers might play a role in upgrading TWC's capabilities for video. (Sure looks, though, like TWC and others are planning on diminishing analog channels for more space. That wouldn't diminish service, IMO, because all analogs are already duplicated in digital.)

Each new Cisco router can deliver 1.2 terabits/sec (trillion bits) and up to 72 routers can be linked for a 92-Tbps system. By contrast, one HD channel, via TWC's 256 QAM, requires up to ~19 Mbps (million bits per second).

I've pictured cable-network switched-broadcast techniques as being similar to video-on-demand (VOD), except instead of programs being stored on hard-disk drives they're available at the head ends, or more-localized nodes, for instant all-electronic switching. Just like the Internet, it seems you could tune any TV channel in the world if it's collected and waiting at the head end, or perhaps by further bit routing (to other sites).

No doubt mrkaos can't disclose proprietary Cisco details, but perhaps he could elaborate on switched systems. Noticed a recent CED news item (http://www.cedmagazine.com/cedailydirect/0503/cedaily030513.htm)(about 7/8 down) indicating switched broadcast technology isn't all that reliable yet. (I cited two articles on Ethernet-like cable systems in an earlier post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=3355113#post3355113).) -- John

Someone just mentioned to me that it takes the removal of about 4 analog channels to add one HD channel. Is this true ?

Removing about four digital channels would provide bandwidth for one HD channel. A 6-MHz cable slot (frequency) handles one analog, or it's ~39 Mbps digital used for about 2 HDs or 8-10 SDs (with typical 256 QAM delivery). That's overlooking digital manipulation from rate shaping and statistical multiplexing, which somewhat reduces bandwidth demand. -- John

Sooooo....does this mean we're getting more HD channels or not? ;) :D

TM

Believe Bob Watson's comment a while back that TWC is out of spectrum for new HD channels until the 4th quarter is probably accurate. It'd be nice to learn how they're upgrading--cutting analog, switched broadcasting, etc.--from insiders, but it looks like waiting for the hardware upgrades is necessary. My choices for whacking 12+ SD channels for three or more new HD channels would no doubt differ from others.

Ran across the following while reading the latest issue of Wired:
Cable TV is like a crappy pizza joint: You can order a small, medium, or large pie, but you can't design your own - and no slices. Put off by increasing cable TV fees, US senator John McCain aims to introduce legislation to force providers to offer an à la carte menu as a way to rein in monthly bills and expand subscribers' choices. We asked Time Warner Cable chair and CEO Glenn Britt to get in front of any regulation and give his customers the option now.

WIRED: You're already giving us video-on-demand and DVRs. Isn't à la carte cable TV the logical next step?
BRITT: À la carte is really a step backward - you would end up with a lot less choice, less diversity. People like having maximum choice. We carry many channels that appeal just to niche groups and minorities. It's by no means clear those could survive in an à la carte regime.

So those channels aren't really supported by the marketplace. If I could pay for just the channels I want, I'd be a lot more valuable to advertisers.
Cable isn't about having a few channels that appeal to everybody, it's about having a lot of channels that appeal to everybody. You may not watch C-Span every night, but it's good to know it's there.

Sure, good for C-Span and Time Warner. But as a consumer, I'd rather lower my bill by paying for only the channels I actually watch.
The myth is that if you pay $60 a month and get 100 channels, then you could buy 50 and cut your price in half. That isn't how the economics work; there are a lot of fixed costs. You'd most likely end up with people paying the same amount of money for fewer channels. It's analogous to a newspaper or magazine. Hardly anybody reads every article in the paper; you read selectively. But nobody says, "Gee, you should only buy the sports section if that's all you want."

Cable and satellite are in cutthroat mode. Couldn't à la carte be an opportunity for you to differentiate Time Warner Cable from its competitors?
If that's what people wanted, yes. But the assumption is wrong. Every time we've tried to offer more packages with fewer channels - more toward à la carte - consumers always went for the big packages. People actually like this service, which is why 90 percent of the homes in the country buy it.
- Lucas Gravesdpc

à la carte channels would be a nightmare from an operations/billing point of view. These guys can barely get a bill for basic, premium, high speed data, and now voice, let alone an infinite # of possible channel combinations. Besides, à la carte would only benefit me if I could de-select the 28 channels I never watch so that I could add 7 HD channels I would. ;)

Drew

Voom here I come !

John,
My vote would differ from yours only in that I'd whack 2x as many SD channels for 2x as many HD channels :)

TM

Agreed Anthony.

To answer a previous question.... At this point I would rather get the HD-DVR instead of INHD1 & 2, HDNET. I love the non-HD DVR... and yeah it sucks to have to go to the bedroom to watch recorded show. A 3rd party HD-DVR like a Reply just isn't the same.... and I already own a Reply. The PIP feature of the TWC DVR makes it right there.

Now if they were offering ESPN-HD, FOXHD, MSGHD... then maybe i'd take those over the DVR.

Im also || this close to switching to RCN... they just announced adding Starz-HD to their lineup. Shouldn't take long for them to roll it out to Manhattan... since Manhattan seems to be one of their "test" markets. They already have the HD-DVR in Manhattan, but its not dual-tuner PIP though. :(

John Mason -
I have not forgotten your question. I will answer it in detail when I have more time and reread my NDA about what I am working on. Sorry for the delay but I am a contractor and I just got out of a 16 hour day. I will be in nyc on Sat and will answer in detail including the CRS boxes.

- JB

I won't get into the details of why I was calling, as it's not relevant, but I found myself on the phone with a TW Customer Service supervisor just now after he did something that the rep claimed wasn't possible in trying to fix a TW screwup.

As the supervisor was ending the call, he said "Thank you for choosing Time Warner Cable."

"Excuse me?" I responded, in a somewhat offended tone.

"Thank you for choosing Time Warner Cable," he repeated.

"I would ask that you not thank me for something I did not do. I did not choose Time Warner Cable, nor would I do so in the future if given the option."

"Thank you for choosing Time Warner Cable," he tried again, knowing that the call might be recorded for quality assurance, and that he needed to end with the appropriate sign off.

"After I moved in, my building signed an exclusivity deal with Time Warner Cable, my windows face north, and I get no over the air reception. I would hardly call doing business with Time Warner a choice."

"Thank you for choosing Time Warner Cable."

I finally hung up on him, as I couldn't take any more of it. I'm tempted to drop them a letter suggesting that they only use that line with me if they're going to let me choose to to business with someone else.
-JMP

LOL... I guess you "chose" to have a TV... so you "chose" Time Warner as compared to watching say... DVDs. ;)

Sorry... had to say it.

Classic.

I was looking for info on TW HD and found this site. Thanks for the info.

FYI: Time Warner was swapping out all old cable boxes and converting users to DTV by the end of June, even giving 30 dollars or so to customers for doing this. I don't know if this will help clear the way for more HD channels.

I just got digital cable and was trying to find out about Yankee games and ESPN HD and the other channels since TW is mandatory in the building here.

Thx for your info

Originally posted by nycsm


FYI: Time Warner was swapping out all old cable boxes and converting users to DTV by the end of June, even giving 30 dollars or so to customers for doing this. I don't know if this will help clear the way for more HD channels.


Thx for your info

Has anyone else heard about this?

Originally posted by nycsm
FYI: Time Warner was swapping out all old cable boxes and converting users to DTV by the end of June, even giving 30 dollars or so to customers for doing this. I don't know if this will help clear the way for more HD channels.

Welcome to the forums. Could you provide a source for this? If accurate, as outlined here for years, that could eliminate the ~600-Mhz bandwidth (out of 860+) needed for ~100 analog channels (now duplicated in digital). That's enough space for ~300+ HD channels! -- John

Originally posted by nycsm
FYI: Time Warner was swapping out all old cable boxes and converting users to DTV by the end of June, even giving 30 dollars or so to customers for doing this.

While awaiting some verification of this claim, I did a little math. According to TWC's own published reports, at the end of 2003, 61% of its nationwide cable customers had not upgraded to DTV. Applying that percentage to TWCNYC's 1,194,000 cable customers and assuming that all its DTV-holdouts accept this swap-out, TWCNYC is going to have to install 728,340 new digital STBs during the next month. I'm buying Scientific Atlanta stock first thing Tuesday.

This switching of boxes is making my earlier post more likely. Bob Watson said that switching from analog to digital was part of the bandwidth solution. If you re-read my post I believe that the fourth quarter for additional HD programming as Bob predicts is not the pipedream that many of you think.

Originally posted by Manatus
TWCNYC is going to have to install 728,340 new digital STBs during the next month.

That sure sounds like a pipedream to me. If that's what Bob Watson's plans are, then there is no way we will see more HD channels for another 3 years.

All of us "outsiders" on the forum are hoping that TWC NYC has some other trick up their sleeve then swapping out every last analog box and eliminating the analog channels to free up bandwidth.

Most of us believe this will eventually happen and will give us the 200 HD channels we want, but not in 3 months.

This is why we need some verification on nycsm's claims. If indeed they are trying to do this, it would be important news.

In April I received a letter from Time Warner that stated you needed to change your current cable boxes and remote controls with new equipment bu June 1. Without the new equipment you wouldn't receive any programming beyond channel 80, and they gave you 35 dollars credited to yr account if you brought in the box yourself. If a technician came to yr house you got 15 dollars credit. They gave you free DTV up until June 1st . You could transfer to DTV or keep yr original service but you would lose channels.

I don't work for Time Warner and can't verify if ALL boxes were swapped in nyc. I just was looking for some info on HDTV and was reading the last few pages and it seemed likely that they might be trying to facilitate this.

I have no idea about the technicalities or if this has anything to do with getting you more HDTV channels.

Originally posted by nycsm
Without the new equipment you wouldn't receive any programming beyond channel 80

nycsm - first off, thanks for your early contributions to the forum! This is definately the place to come for info, and intelligent discussion on HDTV in NYC.

That statement is interesting - it says that the channels below 80 will still work. Are there channels above 80 that are analog? I thought all channels above 80 were digital.

It sounds like TWC NYC is compromising. They are eliminating the channels above 80 which are analog - anyone know how many that is?

The channels above 80 that I received were the same as the ones I get with DTV service up to 99. 99 was not for remote setups and 94 freeview, I don't remember seeing that before. The others IFC, TCM the nick at nite , WAM, ESPN classics ..same channel settings as before.

edit: When I went to the Express Center they had hundreds of cable boxes ready to be swapped out. I received a Scientific Atlanta box named the explorer 3250. These were not new boxes but in good condition. For HDTV I would have to upgrade boxes for free, but I don't know if there is a charge for the HDTV channels. Is there an extra fee for the HDTV channels ?

nycsm, the basic hd channel lineup is free on TWCNYC. The only pay channels are HBO and SHOtime. You get these HD channels for free if you subscribe to the premiums for these two networks.

It is possible that the swap out you mention is for your building only and not the entire system. You did mention that TWC was mandatory in your building, which it is most everywhere, but if your building has some special deal they could be targeting your building with an upgrade.

Thanks for the info. Interesting topic of discussion.

Drew

From what I remember before digital cable with the old boxes you couldn't go past channel 80. You got channels 1 through 80 and that was it.

When I mapped analog channels a few years back (direct NTSC tuner input), writing down which ones were sync scrambled, I logged about 100 channels, with ~30 not scrambled. Looks to me like they're not dropping analog completely, just ~80-100. If so, 20 X 6(MHz) = 120 MHz of freed-up spectrum. That's enough bandwidth for ~60 new HD channels, assuming ~2 channels/6-MHz slot (slightly more are feasible). That's all as speculative as everything else here relating to TWC's plans, of course, and it's puzzling if and why they'd be keeping channels <80 analog when digital versions of these channels have been up for a few years now. Perhaps it's only for the no-converter crowd. -- John

I've heard this too. A friend of a friend (who I've never met) in midtown Manhattan also claimed to get the same letter. I posted about this a while back. nycsm's post is only the second confirmation I've heard of this.

Also, while many people aren't aware, Channels 81-95 ARE currently available in analog. Back in 1997, those channels were introduced as part of a package called MetroChoice when TWC first completed their fiber-optic upgrade. Customers in Manhattan who signed up for this package were given a Motorola/General Instrument CFT-2200 box, while customers in Queens who signed up for this package were given a Pioneer 9000 series box. The package wasn't advertised for very long, as once DTV came along TWC made MetroChoice a legacy package and began to advertise Channels 81 and higher as part of DTV.

If you had an older analog box, like the old Jerrold/General Instrument with the red display in Manhattan, or the old Tocom/General Instrument with the green display in Queens you would not even be able to tune higher than 80. But those channels were there.

If they are removing channels 81-95 from the analog spectrum, they would be inconveniencing VERY few customers while freeing up enough bandwidth for 144 SD channels or 24 HD channels. It's the next logical step and a good move for TWC.

...And they could just be setting up for a bigger A-to-D conversion down the road. Get people to start swapping boxes now so that it's easier to mass-swap later.

I guess TWCNYC is willing to commit to certain new channels, especially when there is a market who will watch. Make it HD, I'll watch for crying out loud!! ;)

Drew

-----------
Gay? Go!
MTVN’s LOGO Launches Surge

BY MIKE REYNOLDS & R. THOMAS UMSTEAD -- Multichannel News, 5/31/2004

MTV Networks finally took the wraps off its long-anticipated gay and lesbian-aimed, ad-supported network last week, targeting a Feb. 17, 2005, launch date for Logo.

But there could be a rush of distribution news in the largely untapped TV genre — one that’s setting its sights on an audience of some 15 million Americans, who wield an estimated annual buying power of $450 billion — in June, Gay Pride Month.

Consider:

here! TV, heretofore a pay-per-view purveyor to direct-broadcast satellite providers that has also scored video-on-demand and subscription VOD deals with RCN Corp., said it will announce several carriage deals in advance of its linear debut this fall;
Q Television Network, formerly Triangle Television Network, is finalizing distribution pacts as it readies for its July 1 debut;
And Rainbow Media Holdings Inc. on June 1 will introduce Divine HD, part of satellite service Voom’s multiplex-movie suite, Cinema 10.
Last Tuesday — following more than two years of starts and stops — MTVN upped the ante in the race to reach the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities.

As MTVN chairman and CEO Tom Freston joked on the conference call announcing Logo’s coming out of the closet: “This was either the worst-kept secret in television or the longest-awaited promise to a very loyal and important television audience.”

What remains to be seen is how wide the smiles for Viacom Inc. officials, including MTVN Group president Judy McGrath, will be down the road.

Given the bandwidth constraints, the rollout of any digital-cable services have been tough of late, much less for a channel that brings political, moral and religious issues to the table.

Still, MTVN president of affiliate sales Nicole Browning projects that Logo — which is to pool shows from the programmer’s varied services — will have 10 million to 12 million households at launch, with carriage in New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Philadelphia, Atlanta and San Francisco.

Time Warner Cable will launch the service in New York on expanded basic, but at press time it was unclear whether or not the agreement was an MSO-wide deal.

The big issue for A to D conversion will always be the non-cable box subscribers, those who just plug the wire into the back of the tv and get cable for 20.00 a month. This is a big chunk of change for any cable provider. The D to A converters will help this transition, but there is cost there too.

Thx drew138 for yr info

Maybe TW only sent the letters to ppl with that package. IIRC I got that package because they were showing the second channel for baseball and basketball and hockey conflicts from MSG or sportschannel, if that was still around then? on one of these channels in the 80's.

Since I had to upgrade the box, it seemed like a good time to look into upgrading to an HD capable set or FP. After seeing these posts in the other sections on the new upconverting DVD players and these projectors I have a lot of reading to do :)

So do you guys know which channels they will be offering in HD ? And if they will start upping the costs to add ESPN HD or INHD?

Thx for yr replies.

Originally posted by drew138
The big issue for A to D conversion will always be the non-cable box subscribers, those who just plug the wire into the back of the tv and get cable for 20.00 a month. This is a big chunk of change for any cable provider. The D to A converters will help this transition, but there is cost there too.

As I've mentioned before, I don't see why they couldn't just leave the 30 or so basic channels alone, and only convert the Standard Service channels to digital. That alone would provide enough bandwidth for a long time to come.

Originally posted by drew138
The big issue for A to D conversion will always be the non-cable box subscribers, those who just plug the wire into the back of the tv and get cable for 20.00 a month.

Just curious--does TWCNYC provide any level of service without a cable box? Its web site says that its cheapest package, "Basic" (at $19.63/mo.), "[i]ncludes Time Warner Cable's exclusive news channel NY1, broadcast, municipal and public access stations, 1 cable box and 1 remote."

Yes - I have it on my spare TV. It's the same channels you'd get OTA in theory plus the City channels (not Robyn Bird!), home shopping channels, CSPAN, NY1, TV Guide, and TBS. You can see the other channels but they're encrypted. In fact even if you have your cable turned off I've never heard of anyone who doesn't still get this when they plug the cable into their TV, probably because it wouldn't be cost-effective to have an engineer unplug it.

While I very much doubt it's June, I presume that at some point TWC will give everyone who doesn't already have one a digital box but the channels above will be on analogue for a long time to come as they will have obligations under the terms of their franchise.

Originally posted by alexjohnson
Yes - I have it on my spare TV. It's the same channels you'd get OTA in theory plus the City channels (not Robyn Bird!), home shopping channels, CSPAN, NY1, TV Guide, and TBS. You can see the other channels but they're encrypted. In fact even if you have your cable turned off I've never heard of anyone who doesn't still get this when they plug the cable into their TV, probably because it wouldn't be cost-effective to have an engineer unplug it.

Hmmm. My question dealt with services provided by TWCNYC, not activities like those you describe that violate Section 165.15(4) of the N.Y. Penal Law ("Theft of services"). As for the cost-effectiveness of having "an engineer unplug" a non- or former customer, I do know that I recently lost all my cable services for a week when a neighbor on my floor moved and the TWC guy (probably not an engineer) disconnected my line instead of hers at the junction box in the stairway where all the cables from apartments on the floor come together.

It might be theft if you cancelled service intending to carrry on receiving it without paying for it, though in these circumstances once you notified TWC that would be debatable as the customer cannot physically stop TWC supplying the service (though granted they can remove the cable that TWC's terms and conditions specifically them them is the customer's). It would be theft if you knew there was some reason why they would be not be able to disconnect the cable - denying access for example. It is semantics but merely observing that an unmetered service you cancelled had not, in fact, been terminated and then doing nothing about it may be ethically questionble but certainly not theft.

As to what happens when you terminate, perhaps that was because an engineer was already on site. I would be a amazed if this happened if you chose to return your box to 23rd Street or were taking it with you to a new address - and actually if they are sending out engineers to disconnect cables that 99% of the time they will have to reconnect when new tenants move in, I would rather not know when I contemplate how hard it is to get appointments at suitable times as it is!

Mantus, you raise a good question. I don't actually know if you can get currently get service without a box of some sort. I do believe that there are legacy/older customers who are paying for service but not using a box. Can anyone confirm this fact?

Mike, I agree that they should be able to leave the basic 30 channels analog and convert the rest to digital.

Drew

I know a few years ago there used to be something called Lifeline Service (for about $11 I think), which was exactly what you guys are referring to, just the cable connected directly to the TV with no box. That was supposed to give you access to all the broadcast and community service channels only, but a few unscrambled ones from the basic tier (like TBS, Court TV, and TNN) were always viewable. I haven't seen this lifeline tier advertised in a while, though. It may still be available, they just don't advertise it.

Even if there were a significant amount of subscribers with this service, they would still not be affected by the swap as described here, since none of the channels on lifeline are above 80 (the highest number is The Weather Channel at 72).

Here's the response I received to the email/letters I sent out a week and a half ago. My comments follow:

-------------------------
From: Watson, Robert [mailto:bob.watson@twcable.com]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 5:24 PM
To: ___________
Subject: RE: HDTV Plans in NYC


Mr. ________,

I received your email to our company president, Glenn Britt. Thank you for your patience up to this point with the challenges we face in bringing more HD programming to our customers. We plan to offer a number of additional HD channels later this year.

However, before that can take place, we must make changes to our system to obtain the bandwidth necessary to carry these channels. Work is underway to achieve this; our plans anticipate that we will add more HD product in 4th quarter 2004.

We recognized the potential of HD programming 4 years ago when we began offering CBS and HBO in HD and have since grown our number of HD channels Additionally, we have been regularly upgrading our HD converter box capabilities, most recently with support for DVI and 1394-Firewire connections to support the latest displays and recording devices. And, in late summer of this year we expect to make available the SA HD Digital Video Recorder. The introduction of the HD DVR has been delayed the drivers to make it compatible with our system in NYC have not be completed.



If I can provide you with any other help or information please feel free to call or contact me via email. I will be out of the office until June 7th, however.



Sincerely,

Bob Watson.
VP of Programming &
New Business Development
Time Warner Cable of NY & NJ

_______________________________


My first response is that he doesn't tell us anything we don't know already, OTHER than with respect to the HD-DVR. Is this the first we've heard about it rolling out it late summer? I realize that "late summer" could mean September, but that's still better than December.

Now for the possible bad news. He says, "Our plans anticipate that we will add more HD product in 4th quarter 2004." I do not read this saying that TWCNYC WILL add additional product during the 4th quarter, only that they anticipate it happening. They also anticipated (at one time) having an HD-DVR in the 1st quarter of 2004. Also, to be technical, they will bring "more HD programming" without having to add a station once FOX moves to 720p sometime later this summer.

We recognized the potential of HD programming 4 years ago when we began offering CBS and HBO in HD and have since grown our number of HD channels.

Technically true, but twcnyc still trails nearly all other TWC affiliates in terms of the number of HD stations it offers.

Additionally, we have been regularly upgrading our HD converter box capabilities, most recently with support for DVI and 1394-Firewire connections to support the latest displays and recording devices.

Well, you don't get bonus points for complying with an FCC mandate. TWCNYC is required to supply a box with Firewire connections.

I don't mean to imply that I don't appreciate the reply. I'm very glad that Bob Watson got back to me. I wasn't expecting him to tell me that they'd have TNTHD, INHD and HDNet on their system by the end of June. Though he didn't tell me much I didn't already know, I do appreciate the information. I think if they were a little more forthcoming with what their plans are (it shouldn't take a letter to the President to get a response), we on this board wouldn't be quite as frustrated with TWCNYC as we appear to be.

I will contact him when he returns from vacation with some followup questions. One question I have is whether they'll have CableCards available in July. I don't anticipate a need for a CableCard immediately, but if TIVO comes out with an HD-DVR, or if the Sony DVR uses Tivo's interface, I'd almost certainly pick one up.

Jergans-I posted virtually the same news from Bob a week or two ago. I did get a follow up to my question as to whether it was realistic to get new HD stations in the fourth quarter. Bob said they're changing some things and it was a realistic time frame for new HD. You can see my posts a few pages back. He alluded that switching from analog to digital is what is going on. He also said that when TWC renegotiates their MSG and FSNY contracts in total, we will get their HD feeds on the INHD networks. By the way FOX just reported that the METS are not renewing their contract with MSG. I wonder if there will be a new station for the Mets like Yes or if this is just a negotiating point.

Wow, a response. That’s nice.

I agree- TW didn’t really give us anything new to chew on.

And yes, it’s a shame,
--to get a response from Bob Watson, you have to e mail Glenn Britt.

Look forward to the next round of talks- keep us posted Jergans.

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks for the outreach efforts. In the next round, perhaps we could inquire as to whether the holdup for ESPN-HD is purely bandwidth or if there are still other sticking points (cost, etc.) in the negotiations. Does anyone know the answer to this?

Thanks again,
dpc

Originally posted by perrycampf
Thanks for the outreach efforts. In the next round, perhaps we could inquire as to whether the holdup for ESPN-HD is purely bandwidth or if there are still other sticking points (cost, etc.) in the negotiations. Does anyone know the answer to this?

Thanks again,
dpc

Time Warner doesn't carry ESPNHD anywhere. That's a national TWC issue, rather than a TWCNYC issue, which is why I didn't post anything.

No one really knows what's going on with TWC and ESPNHD. TWC and Disney/ESPN have a long history of bad feelings toward each other. Remember when TWCNYC took ABC off the air in the summer of 1999?

Originally posted by jergans
Remember when TWCNYC took ABC off the air in the summer of 1999?

Actually, it was the spring of 2000.

Originally posted by MikeNY718
Actually, it was the spring of 2000.

You're right. And I usually look stuff up before I post it....

Originally posted by jergans
You're right. And I usually look stuff up before I post it....

I only remember because it was season finale week on ABC and I was worried about missing some of my favorites. Luckily, there was nothing on Monday night that I wanted to see, and it was back Tuesday.

Quick switch of topics:

Has anyone receieved a firewire enabled box yet? If so, can you report on it.

Does it have 5C working (can you record HBO onto a PC)? Does SD work over it? Are there any menus? Audio problems? How did you get it?

There is some discussion on page 53 of this thread RE: firewire enables boxes

Thread Post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=297592&perpage=20&highlight=firewire&pagenumber=61)

Drew

Originally posted by dkan24
Has anyone receieved a firewire enabled box yet? If so, can you report on it.

Does it have 5C working (can you record HBO onto a PC)? Does SD work over it? Are there any menus? Audio problems? How did you get it?

Yes, I have a SA3250HD with firewire in Brooklyn for about a month now. The person to call at TWCNYC is a very nice lady named Ugwati (that's just a guess at the spelling, but it's pronounced Yoo-gwot-tee) at 212-598-7312. They will not let you pick one up at the customer service center. You need an installation appointment, and the installer will not give you the box unless you have a DVHS or TV with firewire input.

Haven't tried recording to a PC (and DO NOT tell TWCNYC that you plan to), but I do record via firewire to a JVC 30K DVHS. All HD channels recordable except Discovery, due to some encoding error that will supposedly be fixed by an upcoming software update.

Biggest problem is audio dropouts on playback. JVC tells me it's because my DVHS needs a firmware upgrade, so I will be shipping the unit to NJ for that soon.

SD channels & on-screen menus do not come through the firewire port.

It looks like I won't be able to get one as I don't have a firewire enabled TV or DVHS.

Without SD or on-screen menus, Firewire seems pretty pointless to me.

And I will not go back to tape.

There's a LONG thread about the 3250 in the HDTV recording forum, started by Alan of AVS. Not limited to NYC of course, but interesting to read the experiences of people trying this box...

TM

PS - Jergans thanx for posting Bob's response. Personally I don't fault him for making the distinction being planning on/anticipating doing something versus actually doing it. As we know, especially in this town, **** happens :)

Does anyone know what the Fox Channel on chan 705 is? I know it's not true HD 1080i or 720p? So does anyone know what it is? it sure looks better then 480i

I was wondering the same about 705. Has this been on our lineup for a while and am I having a senior moment or is this channel new?

When will we be able to watch the Yankees in HD?

No 705 isn't new, but it doesn't seem to be "True" HD either. Not sure what it is exactly.

My TV identifies the signal on 705 as 480P when my Pace box is set for Passthru

Yup. It's Fox 'widescreen' aka 480p.
Supposedly Fox will start broadcasting in 720p this Fall.

Originally posted by Mobert
Does anyone know what the Fox Channel on chan 705 is? I know it's not true HD 1080i or 720p? So does anyone know what it is? it sure looks better then 480i

TWC-NYC broadcasts Fox Ch. 705 as 480i, not 480p.

I had the 3510HD set to output whatever it receives via component (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i) and Fox Ch. 705 was and is still sent out by TWC as 480i. Now that I use DVI, the 3510HD converts to 480p as 480i is not supported via DVI.

Come the fall, 720p will be welcomed assuming there is enough bandwidth...

Originally posted by dkan24
Without SD or on-screen menus, Firewire seems pretty pointless to me.

And I will not go back to tape.

No doubt, firewire-to-DVHS wouldn't cut it as a primary time shifting method. But until the HD-DVR comes out, it is the only way to record HD from cable. I use a Tivo to record SD, DVHS to record HD. Not pointless at all.

On-Screen Menus are still viewable when you watch direct from the cable box to the TV. If your TV has 2 HD inputs, connect one directly to the SA3250HD, and the other to the DVHS. Use the latter to watch tapes, the former to watch live HD, and you'll still get your menus.

As for the inconvenience and bulkiness of tape, I can't disagree. But you know what I "will not go back to"? Watching shows and movies when the network schedulers tell me to. If you can live without the ability to archive the stuff you record (a deal-breaker for me), it certainly makes sense to wait a few months for the HD-DVR to come out. And eventually we'll have HD-DVRs with built-in HD-DVD recorders, so we'll all be able to retire our VCRs forever.

Is anybody else getting channel 705 broadcasting 720P right now? Scream 2 is on, it is not widescreen and my Pace box is reporting 720P.

EDIT: I just noticed this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=408650) in HDTV Programming discussing this.

Originally posted by QMAN71
Is anybody else getting channel 705 broadcasting 720P right now? Scream 2 is on, it is not widescreen and my Pace box is reporting 720P.


WABC is definitely broadcasting in 720p tonight. I have both TWCNYC and OTA. The OTA receiver identifies the incoming signal on Ch. 7-1 as being "Dolby Digital HD 720p." Which is not, of course, to say that TWCNYC is retransmitting a 720p signal.

I was actually referring to FOX 705, but speaking of ABC, the hockey finals look great in HD.

Originally posted by QMAN71
I was actually referring to FOX 705, but speaking of ABC, the hockey finals look great in HD.

My mistake. I meant to refer to Fox (Ch. 5-1) and for some stupid reason substituted WABC. 5-1 is 720p tonight.

Confirmed in Queens...Channel 705 is upconverted to 720p. At least we know there will be no out of bandwidth excuse for losing Fox...

Hmmm that's a small bit of good news, or at least absence of bad news :).

TM

We better get the Giants in HD when the season starts!

What about the Yankees?