Time Warner Cable HDTV [Text View] - Page 6

AustinSTI

04-11-07, 09:23 AM

So...I emailed Witmer a few weeks back and got a reply from this guy named Terry in customer service. He emailed me to say that my questions were being addressed by the president's office. I was hopeful this meant I'd get some answers (I had requested a schedule for when this year's HD channels would be added). I got a form letter in the mail today and was just really pissed. In addition my local office is clueless about ESPN-2. They gave me a 'Soon' reply.

My Original Email to Ms. Witmer:

Ms. Witmer:

I wanted to take a moment and write you to inform you that after many years with TWC I am very close to cancelling my service and moving to DirectTV. The reason is primarily focused around TWC's abysmal HDTV channel lineup and it's inability to deliver additional HD channels. I am tired of waiting for channels like ESPN2, CW-HD and others which have been broadcasting for sometime to show up on my digital cable box. I've had no explanation for the hold-up nor has any timeline been announced for these channels - at least directTV provides timelines for channel launches. The recently added MHD and AEHD were welcome additions however without ESPN2 HD I'm afraid they just weren't enough to give me a lot more patience with the situation. As VP of programming you have the power to make this type of thing happen. I would urge you to show leadership with TWC and add more channels to your lineup rapidly or you will lose loyal subscribers like myself to your competitors. 35% of homes in the US now have HDTV. Not having the programming from a market leader like TWC is embarrassing for your company and has resulted in frustration from your customers.

In addition I'd like to know whic of these channels coming online in HD this year your company plans to add and when you plan to add them:

2007:
Chiller-HD
Sci-Fi-HD
USA-HD
Bravo-HD
Sleuth-HD
History-HD
TBS-HD
CNN-HD
CartoonNet-HD
TheWeatherChannel-HD
FX-HD
Speed-HD
Smithsonian-HD
BBC-HD
Al Jazeera-HD
Lifetime-HD
MGM-HD
Big Ten Network-HD

If I don't recieve and update from you with a timeline within 60 days, by fall I will guarentee you will lose my business to DirectTV and I will NEVER return to TWC again if possible.

Here is the text of what I sent to Terry the CS rep today:

Terry:

I recieved a 'form' letter in the mail this past week from the president's issue which is not even close the the response I was looking for. This form letter provided no information of value to me nor did it even guess at when the channels I requested information about would be available in HD. I've contacted my local office about ESPN2 specifically this week and they have no idea when its going to be available. Does anybody know anything over there or do y'all just want everyone with an HD set to go over to direct TV at the end of the year? I posed a simple question: When will the channels going online this year in HD be available on TWC (+ ESPN2). I wouldn't have gone to the trouble to write or give your organization the opportunity to keep my business if I had known the response I'd get would basically be me waiting 2 weeks for a form letter. I thought by referring this to the 'President's office' I might get some answers. Boy was I wrong. All I got was poor customer service and a show of how little your organization respects its most loyal customers (I've been a TWC customer for 6 years now). You guys lost my High Speed business because of your inability to fix issues with it and I guess when the NFL seasons starts in about 6 months I won't be a TWC customer anymore since I haven't gotten any of the information I requested originally to make my decision. You can thank your friends (Ms. Witmer and those in the president's office) for wasting my time and pushing another customer towards satellite. All the satellite bashing commercials in the world won't do any good when you cannot provide your customers open honest prompt information concerning the addition of HD channels. I'm disappointed to say the least with the response I've gotten.

Oh and one more thing...if y'all would stop adding pointless on-demand channels that nobody uses then you'd have plenty of bandwidth for content in HD which is what people really want. We have on-demand everything on my system and myself and everyone I know have never used them once.

AustinSTI

04-11-07, 09:24 AM

And of course...still no ESPN-2 in Austin

Donniewb420

04-11-07, 09:49 AM

Riverside_Guy

04-11-07, 10:31 AM

Oh and one more thing...if y'all would stop adding pointless on-demand channels that nobody uses then you'd have plenty of bandwidth for content in HD which is what people really want. We have on-demand everything on my system and myself and everyone I know have never used them once.

Wrong. VOD channels take zero ongoing bandwidth, so getting rid of them does NOT increase overall system bandwidth.

What WOULD is TWC shutting down analog channels they send along their lines.

jacksonian

04-11-07, 10:39 AM

Yeah, but getting rid of the 15 shopping channels would help too!

Gary J

04-11-07, 10:42 AM

Yeah, but getting rid of the 15 shopping channels would help too!
But my Granny likes 'em! ;)

Donniewb420

04-11-07, 11:25 AM

Maybe the better wording is not necessarily getting rid of on demand channels, just focusing your efforts to bringing more HD to the table than the on demand crap... totally from a business standpoint, bandwith aside.

AndyHDTV

04-11-07, 11:50 AM

ok that's 1 email sent out.

c'mon guys send 1 out.

Harley_Dude

04-11-07, 12:18 PM

I still don't think that some of you get that Ms. Witmer does not control what happens in the individual franchises. The questions as to what new channels that are coming online this year will be available to TWC customers are valid but wanting to know why ESPN2-HD isn't online in a specific market isn't her area.

If there are channels that have carriage agreements signed at the national level but are not on your local system yet, then it is the management of your local system that owes you answers. I'd start by finding out who your local officers are and sending them email (first.lastname@twcable.com) and also touching base with the business editor of your local newspaper. I was getting personal emails from the President of San Antonio TWC after I let him know that I had called the Express-News and they were doing an article on the agreement with Sinclair and what it meant for us locally (Cowboys/NFC football, 24 and American Idol in HD FINALLY!).

AndyHDTV

04-11-07, 12:41 PM

AustinSTI

04-11-07, 04:33 PM

My bad on the VOD but they are still a waste of space on my dial and geez do I really need so man? BEEP on demand? WTF?

Also: We've gotten a band of 1700s that are broadcasting analog networks on our TWC system. What's that all about? They are broadcasting analog networks on the 2-13 channels AND these 1700s (though the 1700s have no descriptions or anything)

JayPSU

04-11-07, 04:53 PM

I just spoke to a very nice gentleman within TWC Columbus following the writing of a very polite but very upset e-mail to Melinda Witmer regarding TWC Columbus. His name is Mark Psigoda, the VP of Sales and Marketing. I voiced to him my frustrations with TWC and their lackluster HD lineup. He told me that they have heard lots of complaints from customers like myself. He said what they have been doing over the last year has been divided into phases. Phase 1 was to convert all of their channels over to digital, and now they are close to finishing Phase 2 which is to get "Switched Digital" running. He said it's currently being tested and is going well, so they plan on having it up and running in 1-2 months. He said at that point they will have the bandwidth to add a "significant" amount of HD channels. He said in order to add ESPN2HD, he had to cut some pay-per-view channels. He said that for him the problem is not with getting contracts for additional channels, but creating the bandwidth for them. He says he's looking at adding CinemaxHD, StarzHD, National GeographicHD, MHD, and A&EHD immediately once Switched Digital is up and running, and that more will be coming soon after that (he mentioned CNNHD and TBSHD). So there is some hope IF he's telling the truth. I told him that he has to make drastic improvements prior to U-Verse launching or he's going to lose a lot of business. He was actually a very nice gentleman and I highly recommend anyone in this area contacting him (mark.psigoda@twcable.com).

AlbanyHDTV

04-11-07, 05:47 PM

Daryl L

04-11-07, 05:56 PM

Also: We've gotten a band of 1700s that are broadcasting analog networks on our TWC system. What's that all about? They are broadcasting analog networks on the 2-13 channels AND these 1700s (though the 1700s have no descriptions or anything)
Their not actually using twice the banswidth for those analog channels. They just have two channel numbers assigned to each analog channel.

davehancock

04-11-07, 06:44 PM

Their not actually using twice the banswidth for those analog channels. They just have two channel numbers assigned to each analog channel.The odds are that his system is using "digital simulcasting" where a SD video stream (channel) is carried as analog (using a 6MHz channel) and again as digital (12-16 such channels on a single 6MHz wide QAM channel). When using a cable supplied STB, the digital channel will be automatically selected, even though the viewer thinks they have tuned to an analog channel. Also, the channel mapping function in the STB allows the same channel to show up several different places (and at different virtual channel numbers) in the guide).

Also those 1700 channels could simply be "test" channels as well. By test, I mean that they are putting some regular program material on different, higher frequency, QAM channels, in order to make sure that they "get out there", before actually committing program material (new channels ? :rolleyes: ).

Riverside_Guy

04-12-07, 04:40 PM

Their not actually using twice the banswidth for those analog channels. They just have two channel numbers assigned to each analog channel.

Uh, is it not true that one analog channel on a cable system takes up the bandwidth of slightly more than 2 HD channels? That if they stopped sending 5 analog channels, they may fit a dozen HD channels more?

holl_ands

04-12-07, 06:02 PM

Local on-the-air HD channels put out a high data bit rate (16-19 Mbps),
whereas most National HD channels are less than 15 Mbps.

On my TWC-SD system, there are either two Local HD (or HDNET) per QAM-256 carrier or up to three National HD channels.
Recently they backed off to just two HD per QAM, but hopefully that is simply preparing to add more HD.....

DOCSIS 3.0 upgrade allows "channel bonding" the capacity of three (not necessarily adjacent) QAM carriers.
This will facilitate capacity sharing among a much larger number of HD channels, so they can pack more HD's
with fewer macroblocking events, as "busy" HD channels steal bits from channels that are less "busy".

BTW: The maximum data rate is the SAME for 720p@60Hz and 1080i@30Hz presuming neither has been
resampled to HD-Lite. However, 720p is reportedly more tolerant of bit rate starving.....

If only 44 more channels on the Expanded Analog Tier (leaving shopping, et. al. on Basic Tier), are converted
to digital (~ 11 per QAM), TWC could readily add over a 100 National HD channels without leaping to SDV.

AndyHDTV

04-12-07, 08:13 PM

Calgary vs. Detroit on Versus-HD via INHD in now on.

Hopefully this will continue throughout the playoffs as no TWC division added golf/versus-HD.

jefbal99

04-12-07, 08:34 PM

Calgary vs. Detroit on Versus-HD via INHD in now on.

Hopefully this will continue throughout the playoffs as no TWC division added golf/versus-HD.

Will only be on Thursday and Fridays when VSGLF is showing golf coverage

twelvepbrs

04-12-07, 08:37 PM

Local on-the-air HD channels put out a high data bit rate (16-19 kbps),
whereas most National HD channels are less than 15 kbps.

On my TWC-SD system, there are either two Local HD (or HDNET) per QAM-256 carrier or up to three National HD channels.
Recently they backed off to just two HD per QAM, but hopefully that is simply preparing to add more HD.....

DOCSIS 3.0 upgrade allows "channel bonding" the capacity of three (not necessairly adjacent) QAM carriers.
This will facilitate capacity sharing among a much larger number of HD channels, so they can pack more HD's
with fewer macroblocking events, as "busy" HD channels steal bits from channels that are less "busy".

BTW: The maximum data rate is the SAME for 720p@60Hz and 1080i@30Hz presuming neither has been
resampled to HD-Lite. However, 720p is reportedly more tolerant of bit rate starving.....

If only 44 more channels on the Expanded Analog Tier (leaving shopping, et. al. on Basic Tier), are converted
to digital (~ 11 per QAM), TWC could readily add over a 100 National HD channels without leaping to SDV.
i hope you intended to say Mbps instead of kbps, but another issue is that the local OTA transport stream @ 19 Mbps includes all the subchannels also, so you really have to subtract those out and just look at the HD program stream

twelvepbrs

04-12-07, 08:40 PM

Uh, is it not true that one analog channel on a cable system takes up the bandwidth of slightly more than 2 HD channels? That if they stopped sending 5 analog channels, they may fit a dozen HD channels more?
yes and no, each analog channel uses 6 MHz of bandwidth which is also enough room for roughly 2 HD channels or 6 SD-digital channels, so if they dropped 5 analogs, they would likely add the corresponding SD-digital channel meaning there would be 4 vacant 6 MHz bands to fill with HD channels (should be 8 total HD's added hopefully or 12 if they cram 3 HD's into each 6 MHz band))

SteveC

04-13-07, 09:01 AM

I noticed last night that ESPN2HD is now in the HD tier for TWC in Akron, OH. Can't speak for the rest of NE Ohio.

AustinSTI

04-13-07, 09:26 AM

So is D* HD crappy when compared to TWC or what? I'm tired of waiting on TWC and thinking of switching before this years NFL season however HD is VERY important to me...

AustinSTI

04-13-07, 09:40 AM

Forgot it...answered my own Q.

Donniewb420

04-13-07, 10:45 AM

Forgot it...answered my own Q.

lol, what was the answer?

ebaker

04-13-07, 03:30 PM

davehancock

04-13-07, 03:50 PM

For TWC customers in San Diego
In response to an email regarding availability of HD programming, I received this (below) from Ms. Judy Walsh, President, Time Warner Cable–San Diego Division (Judy.Walsh@TWCable.com):

"Thanks for your feedback. We are definitely planning to add ESPN2-HD this fall and will most likely add some other HD channels as well. We are upgrading our network over the summer, which will vastly expand our channel capacity beyond the hundreds of channels we carry today. HD programming is very popular with our customers and we will continue to improve our HD offering as new program sources become available to us.

Your comments are very much appreciated. Thanks for being our valued customer.

Judy Walsh"
Her comment about upgrading their network rings true. For one, they can't simply dump all their analog channels to make space for new HD channels. Ultimately they probably will dump many of them - but they just can't dump them immediately. So to get the space needed they need to do other things. One is to expand the bandwidth of their network. This takes some time, as they need to check out the entire network and make repairs as needed to assure that channels in the expanded frequencies work. Another, is the move to SDV. To do that (assuming that they have the needed fiber network in place) they will have to install needed hardware at the local nodes.

Gary J

04-13-07, 03:59 PM

Another, is the move to SDV. To do that (assuming that they have the needed fiber network in place) they will have to install needed hardware at the local nodes.
We have 2 HD channels on SDV all over South Carolina. I am not aware of any hardware changes though. And there has not been any fiber laid within 50 miles of here.

AustinSTI

04-13-07, 04:21 PM

The answer is that D* uses HD-Lite which is inferior in quality to the TWC broadcasts. I got a call from a TWC-Austin programming rep. He said ESPN2 should be added 'soon' - within the month - and that they were meeting about it today. He also said they were hitting some technical limitations (which suggested bandwidth to me and I mentioned that as such). When I suggested that they go all digital and kill the analogs his answer was 'That would piss off a lot of customers who don't want a set top'. When I replied 'But they'll all have to have one in '09 anyway so why not get em used to it now' he chuckled but didn't have much else to say ;)

Gary J

04-13-07, 04:31 PM

When I suggested that they go all digital and kill the analogs his answer was 'That would piss off a lot of customers who don't want a set top'. When I replied 'But they'll all have to have one in '09 anyway so why not get em used to it now' he chuckled but didn't have much else to say ;)
Analog goes away only for OTA.

ebaker

04-13-07, 04:34 PM

Her comment about upgrading their network rings true. For one, they can't simply dump all their analog channels to make space for new HD channels. Ultimately they probably will dump many of them - but they just can't dump them immediately. So to get the space needed they need to do other things. One is to expand the bandwidth of their network. This takes some time, as they need to check out the entire network and make repairs as needed to assure that channels in the expanded frequencies work. Another, is the move to SDV. To do that (assuming that they have the needed fiber network in place) they will have to install needed hardware at the local nodes.
Last fall, Comcast in central CA converted all analog channels to digital except their "Limited Basic" tier. Along with that, they provided basic set-top converters and remotes (as many as each customer needed) free of any charge. I wonder if TWC will do something similar to that...?

Daryl L

04-13-07, 04:43 PM

Uh, is it not true that one analog channel on a cable system takes up the bandwidth of slightly more than 2 HD channels? That if they stopped sending 5 analog channels, they may fit a dozen HD channels more?

The odds are that his system is using "digital simulcasting" where a SD video stream (channel) is carried as analog (using a 6MHz channel) and again as digital (12-16 such channels on a single 6MHz wide QAM channel). When using a cable supplied STB, the digital channel will be automatically selected, even though the viewer thinks they have tuned to an analog channel. Also, the channel mapping function in the STB allows the same channel to show up several different places (and at different virtual channel numbers) in the guide).

Also those 1700 channels could simply be "test" channels as well. By test, I mean that they are putting some regular program material on different, higher frequency, QAM channels, in order to make sure that they "get out there", before actually committing program material (new channels ? :rolleyes: ).
AustinSTI appeared to be under the assumption that his TWC office was using bandwidth to carry analog channels below 100 then using more bandwidth to duplicate the analog channels in the 1700's. All I was saying was they probably weren't using two times the bandwidth to duplicate analog channels (not speaking of digital simulcastsing) on two different channels.

My system (Raleigh/Durham/Fayetteville NC) is doing digital simulcastsing, cable box gets the digital version while the tv ntsc tuner gets the analog version all on the same channel number. We have about 15 channels thats duplicated digitally on two channels (all digital) but it's just one channel with two display channels assigned to one channel. Not using two times the bandwidth. Heck Disney East is on three channels with same frequency 723.000 program # 001, source ID 05104 on all three different channels but not tripling bandwidth used for that one station..

OniKoroshi

04-13-07, 04:55 PM

ebaker

04-13-07, 05:05 PM

Thanks for the update, they're still taking too long IMO. They have the monopoly on cable so we're forced to just wait it out or switch to satellite.
Agreed!! The primary reason I have not switched is channel 4, Padre games....especially since most of them are now in HD.

davehancock

04-13-07, 05:29 PM

DOCSIS 3.0 upgrade allows "channel bonding" the capacity of three (not necessairly adjacent) QAM carriers.
This will facilitate capacity sharing among a much larger number of HD channels, so they can pack more HD's
with fewer macroblocking events, as "busy" HD channels steal bits from channels that are less "busy".I thought that DOCSIS just related to Internet access. At least that's what Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS) seems to say. All other references that I checked (via googling "DOCSIS 3.0") verified this. While I realize that this technology could ultimately apply to "Video over IP", once suitable STBs are available, but from what I can find, it does not relate to the current QAM based digital video distribution.

twelvepbrs

04-13-07, 08:27 PM

davehancock

04-13-07, 08:40 PM

i believe that the data streams involved in HSI over cable use QAM (not positive and i'm definitely talking out of my backside) but i know that on my HDHomerun if i do a channel scan, a couple of the channels come up with an "Internet" tag applied to them....Yes, internet data streams do use QAM channels (which is a modulation scheme for digital data) and DOCSIS 3.0 is a method for combining (channel bonding) these (or parts of these) QAM channels for Internet data. But, I haven't been able to find anything where the channel bonding technique is able to be used for digital video data streams.
also wrt/HD-Lite, i was under the impression that the national HD's that were carried in mpeg2 were HD-lite, but that local's and all the new HD's in mpeg4 weren't considered HD-lite, although the mpeg4 will have a lower bitrate, the extra bells'n'whistles in the codec should still preserve a quality pictureYou are apparently speaking here about DirecTV and Dish. TW does not utilize MPEG-4 (their cable boxes do not have that capability). MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 is not related to HD-Lite (the satellite companies use both combinations). MPEG-4 currently is about 80% more efficient than MPEG-2 at the same quality level. Of course, limit resolution (aka HD-Lite) and you use less bits with either compression scheme.

twelvepbrs

04-13-07, 08:45 PM

Yes, internet data streams do use QAM channels (which is a modulation scheme for digital data) and DOCSIS 3.0 is a method for combining (channel bonding) these (or parts of these) QAM channels for Internet data. But, I haven't been able to find anything where the channel bonding technique is able to be used for digital video data streams.
You are apparently speaking here about DirecTV and Dish. TW does not utilize MPEG-2 (their cable boxes do not have that capability). MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 is not related to HD-Lite (the satellite companies use both combinations). MPEG-4 currently is about 80% more efficient than MPEG-2 at the same quality level. Of course, limit resolution (aka HD-Lite) and you use less bits with either compression scheme.
Yeah, that was just my ¢2 about HD-lite in response to AustinSTI's questions

perrycom

04-13-07, 10:57 PM

I noticed last night that ESPN2HD is now in the HD tier for TWC in Akron, OH. Can't speak for the rest of NE Ohio.
It's on here in Warren as well. :D

holl_ands

04-13-07, 11:40 PM

I thought that DOCSIS just related to Internet access. At least that's what Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS) seems to say. All other references that I checked (via googling "DOCSIS 3.0") verified this. While I realize that this technology could ultimately apply to "Video over IP", once suitable STBs are available, but from what I can find, it does not relate to the current QAM based digital video distribution.
DOCSIS 3.0 Channel Bonding is typically described as improving the Internet download speed,
and even more importantly, the pathetic upload capacity....esp. for SlingBox & Video conferencing.
Now in test....Coming to us....maybe next year????

=========================================
If you read the DOCSIS 3.0 party line, they talk about an ALL IP network, wherein MPEG2
or MPEG4 video data are encapsulated within IP headers.
http://www.broadcom.com/press/release.php?id=801136
This should simplify video program delivery from a wide variety of program providers scattered
throughout the world---not just the MSO's "walled garden".

It should be more efficient to have just one copy of HOWDY DOODY EP.1.3 on a central server,
rather than many, many copies throughout the nation.
It would only require ONE IPTV connection, vice an expensive server daisy chain in between....
But would need a means to track individual IPTV orders to a single bill....

Hence, DOCSIS channel bonding is discussed in the context of IPTV---which could be popular
broadcast channels, infrequently watched broadcast channels, VOD, PPV, UTUBE or that elusive EP.1.3.
http://www.arrisi.com/products_solutions/applications/white_papers/Beyond_VoIP_White_Paper.pdf

Most current discussion of channel bonding for QAM video delivery is wrt Euro IPTV, but in the
next couple years, the cable MSO's also plan to offer IPTV/MPEG4 delivery....for "new services".
And will be in the new OCAP enabled STBs to be available starting 1 July.

===================================
Another more immediate aspect of DOCSIS 3.0 affects cable STBs: DSG.

DSG (DOCSIS Gateway) uses high speed QAM-256 vice current QPSK to "talk" to the STB,
whether to download OCAP software, program guide info, interactive news/skeds/games,
IPTV or (future) DCAS (Downloadable Conditional Access System):
http://www.broadband-today.com/article/CA6410543.html?nid=2907
Uplink upgrade requires new cable STB's, cuz it needs a new RDC modulator.
But it appears that the downlink only FDC upgrade might be possible with current STBs....

========================================
I have to admit, I haven't (yet) found anyone talking about using Channel Bonding
to improve STATMUX efficiency for HD channels....probably cuz it wouldn't be backward
compatible with CableCARD HDTVs....but could be future upgrade for SDV channels.

Alternatively, IPTV with channel bonding coud be used instead of SDV for many infrequently viewed channels....
And would avoid macroblocking when they attempt to carry more than two HD channels per switched QAM....

We shall see what the future will bring.....things they are a'changing....

HDTVFanAtic

04-14-07, 04:04 AM

Hopefully this will continue throughout the playoffs as no TWC division added golf/versus-HD.

Funny as golf/versus-HD was added to the system here about 2 hours before you hit the submit button.

davehancock

04-14-07, 11:04 AM

I have to admit, I haven't (yet) found anyone talking about using Channel Bonding
to improve STATMUX efficiency for HD channels....probably cuz it wouldn't be backward
compatible with CableCARD HDTVs....but could be future upgrade for SDV channels.

Alternatively, IPTV with channel bonding coud be used instead of SDV for many infrequently viewed channels....
And would avoid macroblocking when they attempt to carry more than two HD channels per switched QAM....

We shall see what the future will bring.....things they are a'changing....Thanks. You are confirming what I had thought. In short, DOCSIS 3.0 is a potential, longer term (few years) partial solution to the shortage of bitspace on cable for the delivery of more HD. It involves a new generation of STBs that not only include MPEG-4 (and beyond) as well as the ability to receive, buffer and playout the IP based data stream. This likely will not occur on a widespread basis until all of the other expansion approaches (reduction in analog channels, bandwidth expansion and SDV) have been implemented.

Riverside_Guy

04-14-07, 11:46 AM

DOCSIS 3.0 Channel Bonding is typically described as improving the Internet download speed, and even more importantly, the pathetic upload capacity....esp. for SlingBox & Video conferencing. Now in test....Coming to us....maybe next year????

The original issue on upload bandwidth had 100% to do with symmetric "business class" plans that were hugely expensive. To get into the "residential" market, rates had to be far, far lower. That's how the "pathetic upload capacity" stuff started. The capacity was there, but it was a "method" that was used to allow them to price them where they thought they'd get good traction as the typical "residential" customer didn't have near as much actual need.

I suspect that's still very much the case. Look at current symmetric connections, they may be much slower on download than what you get, but are still priced far, far above what we pay.

STILL, the "what we pay" thing seems to be far above what rates are charged in Japan or Europe.

Riverside_Guy

04-14-07, 11:50 AM

TW does not utilize MPEG-2 (their cable boxes do not have that capability).

Are you sure? I've read a lot about how some satellite services are switching to the much newer MPEG4 (AKA h.264) standard, but was under the impression most cable boxes used MPEG2, which has been around for quite a while. If TW does NOT use MPEG2, what do they use?

davehancock

04-14-07, 12:14 PM

Are you sure? I've read a lot about how some satellite services are switching to the much newer MPEG4 (AKA h.264) standard, but was under the impression most cable boxes used MPEG2, which has been around for quite a while. If TW does NOT use MPEG2, what do they use?Good catch! ;)

Should have been MPEG-4. I've gone back and changed it.

AndyHDTV

04-14-07, 07:32 PM

Funny as golf/versus-HD was added to the system here about 2 hours before you hit the submit button.

huh, TWC added golf/versus-HD?
where?

HDTVFanAtic

04-14-07, 09:57 PM

huh, TWC added golf/versus-HD?
where?

Tampa

AndyHDTV

04-14-07, 10:00 PM

Tampa

oh, the TWC clone brightbouse network has added Golf/Versus-HD.

HDTVFanAtic

04-14-07, 10:29 PM

oh, the TWC clone brightbouse network has added Golf/Versus-HD.

No, TWC negotiates and signs all contracts for Brighthouse/Advance/Newhouse as part of their TWC Programming negotiations.

Nothing is signed for carriage that is not carried by TWC.

ESPN2, TNT-HD, UniversalHD etc etc all show up on TWC Systems and Brighthouse at the same time.

davehancock

04-14-07, 10:39 PM

ESPN2, TNT-HD, UniversalHD etc etc all show up on TWC Systems and Brighthouse at the same time.Well, they are not all showing up on all TWC Systems at the same time (witness the rest of this thread).

FUCCO

04-14-07, 10:42 PM

no versus in buffalo

HDTVFanAtic

04-14-07, 10:49 PM

Well, their not all showing up on all TWC Systems at the same time (witness the rest of this thread).

As previously noted, Brighthouse has a contract with TWC to negotiate all their programming and does not put anything on until TWC specifically tells them to do it.

They use the 2.5 Million Brighthouse subs to negotiate better rates for TWC and vice versa.

Thus, TWC has signed a contract for this channel - whether individual TWC systems have put it on yet - perhaps not, but otherwise it would not have been added to the BHN, when there are other channels that TWC has signed contracts for that have yet to be cleared on BHN due to bandwidth.

AndyHDTV

04-15-07, 03:11 AM

jnix17

04-15-07, 07:17 AM

mosuavea

04-15-07, 09:51 AM

no versus in buffalo

Alan Pergament had a short blurb in Saturdays Buffalo News that stated a local TWC official (cant remeber the guys name) said they do NOT plan to carry VS GLF HD because "aside from a few Sabres games they don't offer much programming"

Guess the guy doesn;t watch golf..

FUCCO

04-15-07, 11:27 AM

the tech i spoke too in person on monday stated vs and msg will be in hd in 2 months in buffalo.

broadwayblue

04-15-07, 11:38 AM

the tech i spoke too in person on monday stated vs and msg will be in hd in 2 months in buffalo.

just in time to miss the NHL playoffs. perfect! :( it really seems like these guys don't have a clue.

FUCCO

04-15-07, 11:48 AM

even though i want msg they dont broadcast at HSBC arena in HD so you will not get a hd signal anyway. twc albany does have the msg hd channel there. I talked to this guy 2 days before the announcement that twc signed hd rights with versus. He also told me they want every channel in hd by jan 08. Right now i have 20 hd channels on twc. All i want is my hockey in HS especially the sabres games. I have yet to watch a sabres game in hd

Riverside_Guy

04-15-07, 11:48 AM

huh, TWC added golf/versus-HD?
where?

What I read was that it was a national carriage agreement, but they were clever to note "not necessarily in all systems." So TWC is paying them to use it everywhere, but TWC won't USE it everywhere. So as all customers pay for it, those of us where they won't deliver it are again paying for something that we have no access to.

FUCCO

04-15-07, 11:53 AM

yeah versus is in tampa florida there channel 260

http://www.timewarnercable.com/CustomerService/CLU/TWCCLUs.ashx?CLUID=258&Zip=&Image1.x=40&Image1.y=2

nicholc2

04-15-07, 12:16 PM

FWIW, I saw this post in another forum regarding new HD channels in Columbus, OH. Sounds promising if it's true:

"I just spoke to a very nice gentleman within TWC Columbus following the writing of a very polite but very upset e-mail to Melinda Witmer regarding TWC Columbus. His name is Mark Psigoda, the VP of Sales and Marketing. I voiced to him my frustrations with TWC and their lackluster HD lineup. He told me that they have heard lots of complaints from customers like myself. He said what they have been doing over the last year has been divided into phases. Phase 1 was to convert all of their channels over to digital, and now they are close to finishing Phase 2 which is to get "Switched Digital" running. He said it's currently being tested and is going well, so they plan on having it up and running in 1-2 months. He said at that point they will have the bandwidth to add a "significant" amount of HD channels. He said in order to add ESPN2HD, he had to cut some pay-per-view channels. He said that for him the problem is not with getting contracts for additional channels, but creating the bandwidth for them. He says he's looking at adding CinemaxHD, StarzHD, National GeographicHD, MHD, and A&EHD immediately once Switched Digital is up and running, and that more will be coming soon after that (he mentioned CNNHD and TBSHD). So there is some hope IF he's telling the truth. I told him that he has to make drastic improvements prior to U-Verse launching or he's going to lose a lot of business. He was actually a very nice gentleman and I highly recommend anyone in this area contacting him (mark.psigoda@twcable.com)."

mosuavea

04-15-07, 12:41 PM

the tech i spoke too in person on monday stated vs and msg will be in hd in 2 months in buffalo.

I found the article, I would take a top local exec's word over a tech FWIW

Gordon Harp, the top local Time Warner executive, explained this week that the issue with HD is available bandwidth capacity. He added that other than a handful of Sabres games, the programming on Versus isn’t appealing enough to devote to HD daily with the current bandwith capacity.

http://www.buffalonews.com/214/story/53694.html

FUCCO

04-15-07, 12:52 PM

but they feel mtv hd is..... i was sooooo disappointed when i found out they were adding mtvhd. that alone is a waste of bandwith. Also A&E hd. 75% of the programming is not in HD anyway

AndyHDTV

04-15-07, 12:59 PM

yeah versus is in tampa florida there channel 260

http://www.timewarnercable.com/CustomerService/CLU/TWCCLUs.ashx?CLUID=258&Zip=&Image1.x=40&Image1.y=2

I'm not entirely sure but I think the true TWC systems in florida are transitioning to Comcast and might have channels that they provide, note the lack of HDNet!

AndyHDTV

04-15-07, 01:03 PM

I'm new and I hope this is an appropriate place for this question: Does anyone know why I would have NFL Network showing up in my Time Warner Cable - Bangor, ME channel lineup? It shows up at the Time Warner Cable website channel lineup at channel 777. However, the channel lineup through my receiver still shows UHD at 777. Curious. Thanks.

don't know much about that, does anybody know if TWC up there is switching over to Comcast?

1. that might explain NFL Network
2. it's a free preview
3. TWC finally added it.

bernie33

04-15-07, 01:50 PM

I found the article, I would take a top local exec's word over a tech FWIW

http://www.buffalonews.com/214/story/53694.html

The statement of the tech and the statement of the exec are not mutually exclusive. They may be both be true.

bernie33

04-15-07, 01:53 PM

I'm new and I hope this is an appropriate place for this question: Does anyone know why I would have NFL Network showing up in my Time Warner Cable - Bangor, ME channel lineup? It shows up at the Time Warner Cable website channel lineup at channel 777. However, the channel lineup through my receiver still shows UHD at 777. Curious. Thanks.

It may be an error on the website. There are occasionally errors on the website and/or the printed channel guides. An e-mail or call to customer service should be able to answer the question.

HDTVFanAtic

04-15-07, 01:56 PM

TWC has not signed any contract for this channel.
It is available free of charge for any company that carries the Golf channel & Versus.
As of 4/1/07 Comcast said it would provide it to all companies that meet this requirement.

the issue here is has any "TWC" system added it?
not Brighthouse, as they seem to add channels first for whatever reason.

And again, as i have told you, TWC controls the carriage of BHN channels. BHN adds NOTHING unless under direction of TWC - and TWC WOULD NOT tell BHN to add something TWC did not have the rights to put on their system - TWC has the rights and is instructing systems that want to, to go ahead and put it on their system.

What I read was that it was a national carriage agreement, but they were clever to note "not necessarily in all systems." So TWC is paying them to use it everywhere, but TWC won't USE it everywhere. So as all customers pay for it, those of us where they won't deliver it are again paying for something that we have no access to.

Close but not exactly.

TWC signs a contract and they get a price. Only the systems that carry it pay the prenegotiated price. You do not pay for a channel that is not on your system.

TWC has a negotiated price for CinemaxHD - yet the majority of customers never see CinemaxHD - nor pay for it.

TWC signed an agreement with Sinclair, but as I noted when it was signed, TWC had no national rollout plans of ALL Sinclair stations - they carried the Sinclair Stations which were ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC - but any others were not forced on the system - and up to the local operation.

As such, the Sinclair ABC in Greensboro is carried (and was put on the system within 24 hours of the contract signing), but the other is not, last I heard. The reason they do not put the other on is because they do not want to pay for carrying MyNetworkTVHD.

Tampa does not carry the Sinclair MyNetworkHD channel either, for the reasons stated.

Thus, again, you do not pay for channels not on your system - it is only a pre-negotiated rate.

Wickerman1972

04-15-07, 08:51 PM

Finally TWC is making some changes in my area. The acquisition of Adelphia happened some time ago and we've been stuck in a non-growth lull ever since it did. I got my old Adelphia HD DVR box replaced with TWC's version a couple of days ago. With the new box came two new HD channels: ESPN2 and Universal HD. But I'm expecting several others to be added within the next few weeks. The cable guy told me our lineup is going to become the same as TWC's lineup in Canton, Ohio. They have several HD channels we don't, like Discovery HD and all of the locals in HD. I'm afraid that we might lose Starz HD since most TWC customers don't have that. But if that happens the gains will outweigh the losses. But there is a few things about this box that bugs me. First of all, the bars on the sides of the screen when watching SD content are gray rather than black. I really don't like that at all. Secondly, it doesn't appear to have different resolution output options for HD and SD material. If I set it to 1080i everything is outputted in 1080i, including the SD channels. My old box allowed me to output HD in 1080i or 720p and keep my SD channels outputted at 480i rather than upscaling them. What I would really like to see is a cable box that allows the signals to be outputted in whatever format they come in rather than scaling anything, including the HD channels. This box is yet another step away from that. I checked online and it doesn't appear that this box supports Mpeg4 ( This box is the Explorer 8300HD. ) so I'm guessing it'll have to be replaced again within the next few years. But overall I'm more pleased with recent developments in my area than I am disappointed.

davehancock

04-15-07, 08:55 PM

Finally TWC is making some changes in my area.Which is WHERE??????????????

Why is it that people can't be bothered to include their LOCATION to their profile?

davehancock

04-15-07, 09:08 PM

But there is a few things about this box that bugs me. First of all, the bars on the sides of the screen when watching SD content are gray rather than black. I really don't like that at all. Secondly, it doesn't appear to have different resolution output options for HD and SD material. If I set it to 1080i everything is outputted in 1080i, including the SD channels. My old box allowed me to output HD in 1080i or 720p and keep my SD channels outputted at 480i rather than upscaling them. What I would really like to see is a cable box that allows the signals to be outputted in whatever format they come in rather than scaling anything, including the HD channels.Have you really checked the set-up of this box? The following applies to SARA (I suspect Passport too)
1) Side bars can be adjusted to Black
2) Output can be set to Passthrough (native resolution) - BUT you have to have the box set-it to accept all resolutions.

But there are other AVS threads that address the 8300. :rolleyes:

Wickerman1972

04-15-07, 09:11 PM

Which is WHERE??????????????

Why is it that people can't be bothered to include their LOCATION to their profile?

Sorry. I've mentioned the location several other times in this thread and didn't want to be redundant. But with 1,300 replies I guess that people don't remember my other replies. The location is Minerva, Ohio.

I went ahead and added my location to my profile. I never gave that any thought before.

Wickerman1972

04-15-07, 09:15 PM

Have you really checked the set-up of this box? The following applies to SARA (I suspect Passport too)
1) Side bars can be adjusted to Black
2) Output can be set to Passthrough (native resolution) - BUT you have to have the box set-it to accept all resolutions.

But there are other AVS threads that address the 8300. :rolleyes:

I've went through all the setup menus I can find and haven't seen any options like that. What do you mean by SARA? Is that another line of boxes that TWC cable uses? This box appears to be quite old ( The HDMI input is version 1.0. ).

Wickerman1972

04-15-07, 09:52 PM

Have you really checked the set-up of this box? The following applies to SARA (I suspect Passport too)
1) Side bars can be adjusted to Black
2) Output can be set to Passthrough (native resolution) - BUT you have to have the box set-it to accept all resolutions.

But there are other AVS threads that address the 8300. :rolleyes:

I had a look at another thread and it said something about turning off the box and pressing info and guide at the same time on the box to bring up some other options but it didn't work. I don't know what this SARA and Passport stuff means yet. I just got this box a day or two ago and all I know at this point is that it is called the Explorer 8300HD.

Wickerman1972

04-15-07, 10:08 PM

LMMAO! All I had to do was check all of the output resolutions in the list on the menu. Now the gray bars are gone and everything appears to be outputting in the proper res. I had been looking for a option that actually said passthrough, heh heh. The way the menu was set up it looked like an either/or thing to me. I hadn't reallized you could check all of the resolutions.:)

davehancock

04-15-07, 10:10 PM

Wickerman1972

04-15-07, 10:22 PM

Great (I was working on a more detailed response, but glad you got it).

Thanks for the help. Another thread says something about still having to check pass-through after enabling all resolutions but I can't find that option on mine. Perhaps he's talking about one with a different software enviroment, I'm not sure. But it appears to me to be passing everything along at the original resolution despite me not having checked anything called pass-through ( The screen flashes a second when going from ESPNHD to HDNET and those channels have different resolutions and the quick flicker indicates to me that it is switching from 720p to 1080i. ). I'll have a more detailed look at it tomorrow as I have to leave for work right now.:(

Wickerman1972

04-16-07, 08:13 AM

Yep, this is a Passport 8300. Channel 611 gives a bunch of information about the box and this is running on Passport Echo 2.6.002. So that must be why you have some different menus than I do. But it doesn't look like checking anything called pass-through is necassary on this one. My TV tells me what signal it is receiving and on SD channels it says 480i, on HDNet it says 1080i, and on ESPNHD it says 720p. I guess that just checking all of the different resolution types is all that needs to be done with Passport to get everything passed along at its native resolution without scaling. Very, very cool. I've always wanted a feature like this. Having to choose either 1080i or 720p for all of the HD channels always bugged me. And thank God those wretched gray bars are gone, heh heh.:) But ya' know, what's really goofy about this box is that to get it to do what I want it to I have to set the aspect ratio backwards. I have a 16:9 TV and logic would suggest that I need to pick the widescreen setting. But that screws everything up. It makes my SD channels squeezed if I have my picture set to normal and it gives me those crappy gray bars if I have it set to Full . But when I set it to normal aspect ratio everything is right. I get nice normal-sized ( The gray ones are thinner than they should be. ) BLACK bars on the sides and my HD widescreen channels continue to display normally. Weird.

WilliamR

04-16-07, 08:23 AM

Time Warner in Northeast Ohio just added Universal HD. YEAH! Question, the guide shows no data available, however shows are running on it all the time. Anyone know the web site address of what the schedule is for Universal HD. I tried Time Warner's site, nothing. I tried googling Universal's HD and couldn't find anything for their site.

Amel

04-16-07, 08:25 AM

I tried googling Universal's HD and couldn't find anything for their site.

you did?

I am not sure if you did...

anyways

http://www.universalhd.com/

nicholc2

04-16-07, 10:12 AM

And thank God those wretched gray bars are gone, heh heh.:)
So you got the gray bars to disappear by stretching the image to fill the screen for SD? Or did you get the bars to change to black? If you got them to change to black, how?

WilliamR

04-16-07, 10:55 AM

you did?

I am not sure if you did...

anyways

http://www.universalhd.com/

Yeah, but I seperated it, and after the 4th page of talk about how high def is universal I gave up. Thanks for the link!!!!

Wickerman1972

04-16-07, 11:04 AM

So you got the gray bars to disappear by stretching the image to fill the screen for SD? Or did you get the bars to change to black? If you got them to change to black, how?

I did an edit on my last post about that. I had to set the aspect ratio backwards. I know that sounds strange but it worked. Go back and see what I added to my last post for more details. Thing is though my HDTV has auto-sensing component inputs ( I think most HDTVs do. ). After setting the aspect ratio in the box backwards I have 480i on my TV set to normal view and HD to Full so it changes automatically when I go from one to another. So try setting your box's Aspect Ratio setting to Standard (4:3), Letterbox 16:9 picture ( Also make sure you have all of the different resolutions checked in the Output Resolutions menu. ). Then go to one of your SD channels and set your TVs picture to Normal. Than go to one of your HD channels and if it isn't already set it to Full view. If your input is auto-sensing those different views for those different resolutions should stay that way and switch on their own so you don't have to keep switching them yourself. These settings will also eliminate any scaling by the box ( But not your TV, of course.). 720p channels will output as 720p, 1080i channels as 1080i, etc.

Riverside_Guy

04-16-07, 12:09 PM

Have you really checked the set-up of this box? The following applies to SARA (I suspect Passport too)
1) Side bars can be adjusted to Black
2) Output can be set to Passthrough (native resolution) - BUT you have to have the box set-it to accept all resolutions.

But there are other AVS threads that address the 8300. :rolleyes:

Mmmm, not for Passport. There is NO option for other than middle gray for sidebars AND there's no "Pass-through;" to get the same effect, one just selects ALL possible resolutions. That means the 8300 will NOT scale up or down, all of that is left to your display.

Wickerman1972

04-16-07, 12:12 PM

Mmmm, not for Passport. There is NO option for other than middle gray for sidebars AND there's no "Passthrough;" to get the same effect, one just selects ALL possible resolutions. That means the 8300 will NOT scale up or down, all of that is left to your display.

Yeah, I have Passport and fiddled around until I got what I wanted. There is a way to get rid of the gray bars though. But you have to start off by selecting normal rather than widescreen in the aspect ratio menu to get it that way despite your TV being widescreen.

Riverside_Guy

04-16-07, 12:22 PM

Yeah, I have Passport and fiddled around until I got what I wanted. There is a way to get rid of the gray bars though. But you have to start off by selecting normal rather than widescreen in the aspect ratio menu to get it that way despite your TV being widescreen.

Yes there is a "way" BUT it is not native to the 8300. But it depends on exactly what capability your TV has. For me, it involves having the TV treat ALL SD channels as 4:3. That means whatever the 8300 sends, it will be put "inside" a 4:3 box. The 8300, tuned to a SD channel, "sends" it with gray sidebars (notice that the 8300 has a "dual' setting where you set widescreen and 4:3 in one control). Because it's squeezed by the TV, the actual image is horizontally squeezed. So, I set it to "squeeze" and that rids the gray bar and "sends" a distorted image to the TV. BUT (here the trick) the TV horizontally squeezes that stretched image BACK to a normal, non-distorted image.

So my 8300 setting is "16:9 widescreen:4:3 stretch."

Wickerman1972

04-16-07, 12:29 PM

Yes there is a "way" BUT it is not native to the 8300. But it depends on exactly what capability your TV has. For me, it involves having the TV treat ALL SD channels as 4:3. That means whatever the 8300 sends, it will be put "inside" a 4:3 box. The 8300, tuned to a SD channel, "sends" it with gray sidebars (notice that the 8300 has a "dual' setting where you set widescreen and 4:3 in one control). Because it's squeezed by the TV, the actual image is horizontally squeezed. So, I set it to "squeeze" and that rids the gray bar and "sends" a distorted image to the TV. BUT (here the trick) the TV horizontally squeezes that stretched image BACK to a normal, non-distorted image.

So my 8300 setting is "16:9 widescreen:4:3 stretch."

Yeah, I started off with that option but didn't like it because the box's menu had little gray bars surrounded by black bars. The way I have it now everything is right.

mrkrispy

04-16-07, 01:34 PM

JayPSU

04-16-07, 01:48 PM

I did an edit on my last post about that. I had to set the aspect ratio backwards. I know that sounds strange but it worked. Go back and see what I added to my last post for more details. Thing is though my HDTV has auto-sensing component inputs ( I think most HDTVs do. ). After setting the aspect ratio in the box backwards I have 480i on my TV set to normal view and HD to Full so it changes automatically when I go from one to another. So try setting your box's Aspect Ratio setting to Standard (4:3), Letterbox 16:9 picture ( Also make sure you have all of the different resolutions checked in the Output Resolutions menu. ). Then go to one of your SD channels and set your TVs picture to Normal. Than go to one of your HD channels and if it isn't already set it to Full view. If your input is auto-sensing those different views for those different resolutions should stay that way and switch on their own so you don't have to keep switching them yourself. These settings will also eliminate any scaling by the box ( But not your TV, of course.). 720p channels will output as 720p, 1080i channels as 1080i, etc.

Unfortunately the picture on SD channels doesn't look quite as good when you do it this way. The picture is also a touch thinner. I usually just leave it at 1080i and deal with the grey bars so I can get the better SD picture quality. If anyone knows how to change the bars over to black yet still keep it set at strictly 1080i, please let me know!

davehancock

04-16-07, 02:08 PM

Guys,

How about taking this discussion to the appropriate AVS 8300 w/Passport thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10295729#post10295729) and let this particular thread get back on topic.

eddy_winds

04-16-07, 02:18 PM

Ok
omw
;)

ebaker

04-16-07, 02:36 PM

I emailed the local Time Warner here in San Diego regarding adding the Versus HD channel for the NHL playoffs. Predictably, they have not responded. Every year it is the same thing "we are adding more channels at the end of the year" which last year turned out to be Premium HD channels. They have a reserved channel for NBA HD, I don't know why they can't use that for hockey games. Me and the other 3 people that like NHL still would love to be able to watch them :)
Try an email to Judy Walsh, President, Time Warner Cable–San Diego Division:

judy.walsh@twcable.com

I emailed her about the lack of HD programming on TWC, particularly ESPN2-HD. She did answer, but with the same old response: "later this year....."

Harley_Dude

04-16-07, 03:30 PM

Try an email to Judy Walsh, President, Time Warner Cable–San Diego Division:

judy.walsh@twcable.com

I emailed her about the lack of HD programming on TWC, particularly ESPN2-HD. She did answer, but with the same old response: "later this year....."

Don't forget to get your local newspaper (try the business or sports editor) and your local ESPN sports radio affiliate (XSPN-AM 800) to start bringing it to the publics attention. A little griping in print or over the airwaves will start building more pressure for the local TWC office to reexamine their priorities with regards to HD content.

Bruuce

04-16-07, 07:36 PM

Does anyone know if TWC plans to carry Monsters HD anytime soon? I see it on the frontpage of this thread but I was wondering if anyone has any additional information. thanks

AndyHDTV

04-16-07, 07:44 PM

Does anyone know if TWC plans to carry Monsters HD anytime soon? I see it on the frontpage of this thread but I was wondering if anyone has any additional information. thanks

Doubt it, it's part of Voom's 17 HD channels.

bgooch

04-16-07, 07:47 PM

Premium cable dollars at stake
Time Warner generates nearly $77 million in Milwaukee fees
The Business Journal of Milwaukee - April 13, 2007
by Rich Kirchen

Despite losing subscribers to satellite television, Time Warner Cable has fought back with a combination of higher subscription rates and new services to increase revenue by 14 percent since 2000 in the city of Milwaukee.

In 2006 alone, Time Warner saw its revenue increase by 7 percent, to $76.7 million, in Milwaukee partially because of higher subscription revenue and a recent revenue source -- TiVo-like digital video recording.

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2007/04/16/story1.html?from_rss=1

AndyHDTV

04-16-07, 08:00 PM

Time Warner generates nearly $77 million in Milwaukee fees[/url]

They probably reinvest 1 million of that 77 back into Milwaukee.

twelvepbrs

04-16-07, 09:10 PM

one of the TW peeps who frequents the LA-TWC thread said ESPN2HD on 4/18....hd didnt specify what areas of LA, since some parts of LA already get it, i guess i'll drop by my TWC office and see if it shows up on the demo tv's they have out in the waiting area

bgooch

04-16-07, 11:47 PM

Bewkes: Future of Digital Is Cable TV
TW's Heir Apparent Wants to Deliver Content to Big Screens and Wide Markets

By Claire Atkinson

Published: April 16, 2007
You might think the heir to the Time Warner throne would want to focus on the company's web strategy in his public pronouncements. After all, that sometimes seems to be all Wall Street wants to hear. But Jeff Bewkes doesn't want to follow fashion; he wants to talk TV.

Time Warner President-COO Jeff Bewkes does believes the hype about online video is too one-sided, and that cable video on demand has huge potential.

"Television is very important and increasing in value, and network-based interactive TV is very powerful" -- even more powerful, he said, than the internet.

Focus on TV over internet
It's a surprising opening statement given that Mr. Bewkes' corporation is home to AOL, a company that just snagged a contract to provide online ad services to News Corp. and NBC Universal's still-unnamed online video venture.

Mr. Bewkes stressed, of course, that he's not knocking new media, but he does believe the hype about online video is too one-sided, and that cable video on demand has huge potential. "Media coverage of video on demand is overweighted to the internet," he said. "The biggest audiences for video on demand are on TV screens now and in the future."

There are about 12 billion reasons Mr. Bewkes, 54, believes TV is still where it's at. Time Warner's annual report shows that of the $44 billion that cycled through the media giant in 2006, cable accounted for the largest slice of revenue, almost $12 billion, while AOL, just slightly larger than the Time Inc. publishing division, drew $7.8 billion. Elsewhere, filmed-entertainment, which includes Warner Bros. TV programming, and networks, which houses HBO, each accounted for $10 billion. HBO is the top driver of video-on-demand streams in homes with cable.

Meals better than snacks
This traditional-media empire, anchored atop an upscale shopping center on New York's Columbus Circle, has a lot resting on preserving the network-TV business model in the digital future. How is Warner Bros. going to get $13 million an episode of "ER" if an iPod user can cut out the middleman and download it for $1.99?

In Mr. Bewkes' view, the future is all about delivering content on big screens to wide markets. HBO fans might be able to info-snack on "Entourage" snippets at iTunes, but they won't be able to eat a meal. For full-length episodes, consumers will have to go to cable operators, where HBO has full video rights to its programming and delivers an extensive menu. Mr. Bewkes would like to see broadcast networks get onboard with video on demand, and doesn't believe iTunes' subscription-only model is in Time Warner's best interest. "The future of video on demand on iPods or hand-helds doesn't have to be pay-per-show; it can be ad-supported."

Mr. Bewkes, the assumed CEO-elect at Time Warner, said it's cable operators who will be best-positioned to deliver content wherever customers want it and research however advertisers want it diced.

TW third biggest
Time Warner is the country's third-largest cable operator, behind Comcast and DirecTV. Time Warner Cable acquired Adelphia Systems earlier this year and began trading on the New York Stock Exchange with its own ticker symbol in March. It serves 13.5 million customers and boasted ad revenue of $664 million in 2006, up $137 million (in part due to the acquisition).

One reason Mr. Bewkes might be eager to talk up the cable industry: Some have closely tied the valuation of Time Warner to cable's ups and downs.

In recent weeks, the stock has been under pressure, though it gained a boost April 4 following a note from Citigroup analyst Jason Bazinet, who wrote, "In effect, Time Warner is trading just like a cable stock." Investors were undervaluing the stock, he said, predicting Time Warner could gain 20% this year. The stock has ranged from $15.70 to $23.15 during the past 52 weeks.

First-quarter-earnings results are due May 2, and analysts are starting to take a new look at Time Warner. Talk of a possible sale of Time Inc. and the future of AOL led Bear Stearns analyst Spencer Wang to rate the stock "outperform" in anticipation of some realignment.

In his note, Mr. Bazinet pointed out Time Warner is valued 30% below the average media stock. He cited its strength following the Time Warner Cable spinoff and rated it a "buy."

Tempered reaction
Others have been less enthused. Richard Greenfield, a media specialist at Pali Research, wrote this month, "Without a meaningful increase in the valuation of Time Warner Cable (which we are not anticipating), the valuation on the remaining Time Warner assets is not compelling."

But Mr. Bewkes said interactive cable and the ad revenue it can attract will be a boon to Time Warner. The company can insert ads on 40 networks and break up 325 geographic zones to allow marketers to target particular subsets.

That ability to slice and dice gives cable operators the kinds of insights search giants can only dream about, Mr. Bewkes said -- they can marry TV-viewing habits to web-behavior patterns and phone.

"The future and power of your TV network is to let cable deliver all content on demand, thus enhancing the power of the network experience to introduce and bring audiences to shows rather than disaggregating the network model," Mr. Bewkes said.

He said few consumers would be well-served if cable operators bypassed the networks in video on demand. "It would be like the DVD bin at a big-box store," he said. A cable channel couldn't create the next "Heroes"; the branded-network environment is the best place for that.

Active advertising
Once network-branded video-on-demand channels take hold, cable operators can look toward an expanded audience for advanced advertising. Time Warner Cable already is working with big-name marketers on interactive and therefore highly measurable ad campaigns. Last November, Time Warner Cable launched an interactive-ad product called active advertising, which involves the cable operator placing an overlay on a traditional ad and allowing viewers to, say, request a brochure or hit a button to be taken to long-form, on-demand video from the advertiser. General Electric, American Express and Warner Bros. were part of the initial service. Mr. Bewkes is on hand to help Time Warner Cable sell its story to advertisers, and he waxed poetic on the benefits of "switched video," entering an intricate discussion of "nodes" and "coaxial cable." Since switched video sends messages to display only what's on the screen, rather than delivering all 100-odd cable channels to a set-top box, cable operators can offer much more two-way interactivity, which benefits advertisers.

Along with active advertising, Time Warner Cable offers things such as General Motors-backed Driver TV and eBay TV, which sends alerts to customers when they've been outbid. Late last year, Toyota and Axe stepped up to sponsor Time Inc.'s Sports Illustrated On Demand.

According to Joan Gillman, president of Time Warner Cable media sales, automotive is a category likely to heat up in the video-on-demand space. Still, there is work to do, and hurdles are big. "There is a lot of work to do to help the agencies to catch up," she says, describing the myriad agencies that must come to the table to make a video-on-demand buy happen. The interactive agency is different from the agency buying local spot, which is different from the agency buying TV. Even figuring out how many seconds of play might define an individual program hasn't gained any real consensus in the cable business.

Earlier this year, Time Warner launched a marketing initiative extolling the "Home of the Future" with today's technology. Despite the hype about tomorrow, it's today's $44 billion revenue base that must be preserved at all costs.

Convenient for all, sort of
Even with new digital technology, leave it to Time Warner Cable to find a way of preserving ad breaks. Its Start Over service, delivered to 3.5 million households, allows customers to watch a TV show from the beginning if they come late to the screen. It doesn't, however, allow fast-forwarding.

"It provides some real consumer value, and it provides ad value, too," said Tracey Scheppach, VP-video innovations at Starcom, the agency that helped General Motors in the on-demand space. "You can look back, but you can't skip forward."

Peter Stern, exec VP-product management at Time Warner Cable, said use of the service overindexes in households with DVRs. Those stats suggest to Mr. Bewkes that, in many cases, people don't mind watching ads, despite what they might say.

Google, of course, has been making the rounds of cable operators to find out how it can elbow its way into a share of the local-spot-cable business. Ms. Gillman's response to such competition: "We have a very healthy business. We don't need Google. We have relationships with local car dealers and restaurant groups. ... We are testing and evaluating set-top-box measurement. We have all the pieces; we don't need a middleman."

http://adage.com/print?article_id=116108

bgooch

04-17-07, 06:14 AM

Time Warner Considers Reduction Of Cable-TV Holdings, Says WSJ - Update Tuesday, April 17, 2007; Posted: 03:05 AM

(RTTNews) - New York-based media and entertainment company Time Warner Inc. is weighing a substantial reduction of its cable-TV holdings over time, Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday. The issue will be discussed by the company's board meeting next month, part of an annual strategic review, the repot said, citing people familiar with the situation. The company's management will also present other alternatives for the future ownership of Time Warner Cable, Inc.

WSJ said that the debate on Time Warner Cable, the No. 2 cable-system operator in the U.S. based on subscription, is surfacing just weeks after it became a publicly traded company as part of its acquisition of the cable company Adelphia Communications Inc. Now, outside investors own 16% of Time Warner Cable, while Time Warner owns the remaining.

For Time Warner, the cable operations are a core part of its business, contributing the major chunk of its profit. However, the long-term future of the cable business is not so bright, as the Internet emerges as a viable option for watching TV. Some are of the opinion that it would be better for Time Warner if it gets rid of cable and double down on the Web by buying another Internet company, as it already owns AOL. Industry examples for this choice are the acquisitions of MySpace by News Corp. and YouTube by Google Inc.

However, a complete exit from the cable business is the least likely course to be adopted, WSJ said, citing people involved in the matter. Some are of the view that Time Warner will gradually reduce its 84% stake in Time Warner Cable, possibly through acquisitions, while maintaining a significant interest.

According to people who favor the plan, getting out of the cable business would free up the company's resources for more investment in the Web. AOL, which has struggled to compete with other portals in recent years, has shown signs of recovery recently after shifting from a subscriber-based business model to one that relies on advertising.

One of the downsides of getting out of the cable business is that Time Warner will have to depend more on its slow-growing content businesses of film, television and print. Although Time Warner Chief Executive Richard Parsons has resisted calls on the sale of its publishing business, the exit from cable will increase the possibility of a disposal of the publishing business, the report indicated.

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/BREAKING%20NEWS/533753/

DeathRay

04-17-07, 06:45 PM

Bewkes: Future of Digital Is Cable TV
TW's Heir Apparent Wants to Deliver Content to Big Screens and Wide Markets

Time Warner Considers Reduction Of Cable-TV Holdings, Says WSJ

that's pretty funny

AndyHDTV

04-17-07, 07:50 PM

http://www.tvpredictions.com/voom041707.htm

"Several publications today reported that Time Warner may be interested in buying Cablevision, which is based in New York and serves the tri-state NY area."

"FT reports that Time Warner, Comcast and Liberty Media could be interested in Rainbow."

http://www.tvpredictions.com/voom041707.htm

Riverside_Guy

04-18-07, 11:34 AM

Sheesh, JUST what I wanted to hear, TWC is even thinking about reducing their cable supplier footprint! No wonder they do things like provide HD channels to certain neighborhoods while other are shut out in the same city.

On the other hand, TWC possibly buying Rainbow should mean TWC CAN deploy the 15 or so Voom HD channels.

2 stories, one very bad, one possibly very good. The only thing that makes sense is that Rainbow is content ownership and a cable MSO is merely service. BUT, if TWC had the Voom channels, not only can they compete with Dish, but it puts them a BIG step ahead of Comcast. So when one is potentially on the cusp of a very good acquisition that enhances their cable business, we see they may be considering getting OUT of the cable business.

All I gotta say is <expletive deleted>!

bgooch

04-18-07, 06:04 PM

cableguy101

04-19-07, 05:39 AM

toadfannc

04-19-07, 08:07 AM

Wow you guys, I am impressed with all your knowledge of things that you hear from other people or atricles... I work for TWC here in the Palm Springs area and can tell you things you may want to know... Ask any questions you may have and I will get back at you ASAP.

CableGuy101:

Here's some questions for you ...

How much needless money (that could be used to improve TWC's HD delivery as well as distribution agreements) is TWC going to spend on this ridiculous lawsuit? And, how much are our rates going to increase to pay for it?

http://www.tvpredictions.com/directvtw041807.htm

clapple

04-19-07, 09:42 AM

Donniewb420

04-19-07, 09:50 AM

CableGuy101:

Here's some questions for you ...

How much needless money (that could be used to improve TWC's HD delivery as well as distribution agreements) is TWC going to spend on this ridiculous lawsuit? And, how much are our rates going to increase to pay for it?

http://www.tvpredictions.com/directvtw041807.htm

I somehow doubt he is in "the know" on the aspects of the company in that regard. could be wrong...

FredB

04-19-07, 12:50 PM

I live in Palm Desert and for the years I have nad TWC, they keep advertizing "more HD coming soon".

Well so is Fios and as soon as they are activated, TWC has lost me; because with TWC "soon" is never! :(

When FIOS TV comes to your area you will not be disappointed. Like you, I had TWC for many years (23 years to be exact, including its predecessor companies.) I am now with FIOS and couldn't be happier. More HD channels, more overall channels, better picture quality (especially SD) and less expensive. Switching to FIOS TV when available makes sense, if anyone asks me.

Riverside_Guy

04-19-07, 02:28 PM

hey Riverside

have you watched Voom programming? when I was a subscriber I rarely found anything of interest on their exclusive channels. Plus content was repeated all the time. I'd rather niche HD programming be made available as VOD not 15 separate and distinct channels.

just my opinion Voom (http://www.voom.tv/) is a waste of bandwidth.

Nah, no Dish possible at my location. I AM curious about how good/bad/indifferent their programming is. Generally I don't dislike the concept of channels tightly targeted to a specific interest... as for repeating stuff, I do kinda like that as it gives me MUCH more flexibility when I record stuff (if I had a 3 or 4 tuner DVR, there would be times all tuners would be working!). BUT, if they did a HD VOD (my system had neither HD VOD OR HD PPV!), that would be cool.

SirJW

04-19-07, 03:50 PM

Wow you guys, I am impressed with all your knowledge of things that you hear from other people or atricles... I work for TWC here in the Palm Springs area and can tell you things you may want to know... Ask any questions you may have and I will get back at you ASAP.

How can I get in touch w/ someone who knows about programing, specifically Center Ice in HD, Versus-HD and local channels in HD (KTLA-HD in the South Bay, Los Angeles County). Customer Service reps do not have the answers. Thanks... :)

cableguy101

04-19-07, 04:03 PM

Gary J

04-19-07, 04:30 PM

Is IPTV an alternative to SDV?

davehancock

04-19-07, 07:12 PM

Hey Cableguy - Wake Up!

Well I dont know the whole deal on that lawsuit but I can see why TWC is doing it. DirecTV's claim on having more HD channels than TWC by the end of the year is false. Reason being that TWC right now has had many delays in adding programming and channels in such because of a new on screen guide they are curently producing called Mystro Navigator.This POS software has absolutely nothing to do with adding channels! The current Passport software is not SDV (that's really what you meant by IPTV, isn't it?) capable - but TW could have had Aptiv add this capability.Of course This new navigator is only still in beta testing and is not using the IPTV yet, its still using channels in freq up to 780 Megahertz so this is still limited capacity for TWC systems right now. It's not really in Beta testing. Beta implies a degree of testing showing that it is ready for use, and further requires consent and participation of those testing it. The folks in Lincoln, NE neither gave consent nor has their participation been accepted. They have been TOTALLY ignored - until the Lincoln, NE city council got involved. Hell, this software isn't even alpha ready! There have been some serious bugs too in the beta testing and all employees at some time or another have gotten really mad cuz we went without tv service for a few days!! But once this new navigator is launched and with IPTV working, We will have more HD channel than anybody else. It just takes time to implement it which I hate, but I guess we gotta deal with it, just give it some time its almost here!! NO - you never had to deal with it. You could have simply had Aptiv add the SDV function needed.

Also, you didn't mention that SARA systems have SDV capability NOW. Yet, TW had NOT added many HD channels there either!

I don't know where you got your information - but you really ought to get things straight before posting.

bernie33

04-19-07, 10:54 PM

Wow you guys, I am impressed with all your knowledge of things that you hear from other people or atricles... I work for TWC here in the Palm Springs area and can tell you things you may want to know... Ask any questions you may have and I will get back at you ASAP.

Welcome and thanks for being here. I hope you'll hang around and ignore the abuse that will inevitably be tossed your way.

I've seen other forums and other newsgroups where an employee of a company volunteers, on their own time and in order to be helpful, and people such as davehancock fail to appreciate their efforts and instead just drive them away. I hope that most of us here appreciate your efforts to share information when you can, and when it is appropriate.

Thanks,
Bernie

ttexas22

04-19-07, 11:44 PM

Welcome and thanks for being here. I hope you'll hang around and ignore the abuse that will inevitably be tossed your way.

I've seen other forums and other newsgroups where an employee of a company volunteers, on their own time and in order to be helpful, and people such as davehancock fail to appreciate their efforts and instead just drive them away. I hope that most of us here appreciate your efforts to share information when you can, and when it is appropriate.

Thanks,
Bernie

It's a rough a tumble world out here, Cableguy101, but your input would be appreciated.

TTx

twelvepbrs

04-19-07, 11:44 PM

Well I dont know the whole deal on that lawsuit but I can see why TWC is doing it. DirecTV's claim on having more HD channels than TWC by the end of the year is false. Reason being that TWC right now has had many delays in adding programming and channels in such because of a new on screen guide they are curently producing called Mystro Navigator. It will take place of the current Passport from Aptive Technologies. This navigator will allow TWC to offer Basically for digital customers the ability to get the channels they want through IP TV that FiOS is currently trying to offer. With IPTV, you dont need to have different frequencies to add new channels, you can just use one freq. and deliver the channel the customer wants at that time and never have to wrry about bandwith again!! Of course This new navigator is only still in beta testing and is not using the IPTV yet, its still using channels in freq up to 780 Megahertz so this is still limited capacity for TWC systems right now. There have been some serious bugs too in the beta testing and all employees at some time or another have gotten really mad cuz we went without tv service for a few days!! But once this new navigator is launched and with IPTV working, We will have more HD channel than anybody else. It just takes time to implement it which I hate, but I guess we gotta deal with it, just give it some time its almost here!!

Also I am not sure about LA division. But the prgramming all has to do with coporate approving the channels to be broadcasted!! I know here in Palm Springs with will be having ESPN2 HD MHD, Starz HD starz on demand, and National Geo HD by the end of summer early spring!!
if by IPTV you mean SDV, bandwidth issues will/could still exist in the future, this technology wont be able to reduce the bandwidth used for frequently watched HD channels (Locals, etc...), if TW would just move one or two analogs over to digital, they would already have plenty of room for all the HD channels they have contracted for, and if in a year or two they just dropped all the analogs, they wouldn't need to worry about bandwidth for a long time, another TW rep has said that ESPN2HD is rolling today (4/19) in LA, apparently every other system but west san ferndando valley (chatsworth) gets ESPN2HD now :( :mad: , even though some of them have less bandwidth (AFAIK), you might want to frequent the local HDTV nfo/reception thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10344859#post10344859) for TW LA, not sure if there is one for palm springs, we got MHD months ago eventhough i'm pretty sure everyone in LA would have much rather had ESPN2HD!!!!

cableguy101

04-20-07, 02:22 AM

wow yea, I didnt expect to get hammered by Hancock, i am just trying to relay some info. But yeah thanx Bernie for making me feel welcomed!! Just sounds like he is a angry customer or something, cant help you there... anyways to answer his words
This POS software has absolutely nothing to do with adding channels! The current Passport software is not SDV (that's really what you meant by IPTV, isn't it?) capable - but TW could have had Aptiv add this capability.

SDV is not going to be implemented yet for awhile, but will be in the future, and it does to have to do with adding channels, since you will need a selected amount of bandwith to send everything to the box and not rely on the box switching freqs. like it does now to tune a channel in. We cant add more channel on our system (Palm Springs) yet because we have no more bandwith. To get more bandwith we need to eliminate some more analog channels. 1 analog channel takes up the bandwith that we can put 12 digital channels on. The problem isnt adding channels in that bandwith but having a lot of non digital customers, that can tune in the analog channel, complain about a certain channel they were able to watch being gone now and they cant watch it no more... I guess it would allow TWC to push and sell the digital box for only 7 dollars or so more a month but most people dont wanna pay more money!! so thats the problem, kinda like a equalizer, one take away a channel for a lot of non-digital customers to add a lot of channels for digital customers!! we want to do it slowly so then eventually in 2 years when there is no more analog, we dont have to worry. Also as far as having Aptive add the capability to do SDV; we are trying to get away from Aptive and go with Mystro( The TWC version of Passport so we dont have to pay Aptive for it and we can control more of the options).

It's not really in Beta testing. Beta implies a degree of testing showing that it is ready for use, and further requires consent and participation of those testing it. The folks in Lincoln, NE neither gave consent nor has their participation been accepted. They have been TOTALLY ignored - until the Lincoln, NE city council got involved. Hell, this software isn't even alpha ready!

We are only BETA testing the new Mystro Navigator, Not SDV. Mystro navigator is only available to employee boxes right now. Also to, you are in NE, not CA, so theres a big difference!! So be quiet

NO - you never had to deal with it. You could have simply had Aptiv add the SDV function needed.

You are right, I havent dealt with SDV yet, And we arent going to add it and try it anytime soon from Aptive, like i said, we dont wanna use Aptive no More!!

I don't know where you got your information - but you really ought to get things straight before posting.

I got my information from the source, and it is straight! Besides you are in NE so I cant talk for TWC there!!

if by IPTV you mean SDV, bandwidth issues will/could still exist in the future, this technology wont be able to reduce the bandwidth used for frequently watched HD channels (Locals, etc...), if TW would just move one or two analogs over to digital, they would already have plenty of room for all the HD channels they have contracted for, and if in a year or two they just dropped all the analogs, they wouldn't need to worry about bandwidth for a long time, another TW rep has said that ESPN2HD is rolling today (4/19) in LA, apparently every other system but west san ferndando valley (chatsworth) gets ESPN2HD now , even though some of them have less bandwidth (AFAIK), you might want to frequent the local HDTV nfo/reception thread for TW LA, not sure if there is one for palm springs, we got MHD months ago eventhough i'm pretty sure everyone in LA would have much rather had ESPN2HD!!!!

Yes bandwith issues could still exsist, but not near as bad as they do today!! In 2 years, analog will be gone anyway and the bandwith is going back to the government, which sucks. They should leave half of it still for Cable companies to use. One analog channel equals 12 digital channels or 3 HD channels. ESPN2HD is coming here the end of this summer for us here in Palm Springs, gotta figure out from the Headend guys which analog channel is next to be put out of the analog placement! Maybe Hallmark and Food Channel, lol, i could care less for those, since i already get them in digital!!

feel free guys to gimme more questions!! I wanna help explain anything I can!!

cableguy101

04-20-07, 02:28 AM

Hey guys almost forgot to add this!! some news i got in the company email!!

Publish Date: 04/13/2007
<https://www.twcable.com/images/spacer.gif>
TIME WARNER CABLE AND THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY ANNOUNCE DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS FOR CARRIAGE OF
DISNEY AND ESPN MEDIA NETWORKS' PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC) and The Walt Disney Company (NYSE: DIS) announced that they have entered into comprehensive multi-year distribution agreements that will extend retransmission consent for the ABC-owned broadcast television stations carried in Time Warner Cable systems, and provide for carriage of a broad array of Disney's leading networks and services including: ABC Family, Disney Channel, ESPN, ESPN HD, ESPN2, ESPN Classic, ESPNEWS, ESPN Pay-Per-View, SOAPnet, and Toon Disney.

In addition, Time Warner Cable will launch ESPN2 HD and ESPNU later this year, and certain systems will also offer Disney Channel on Demand subscription VOD and ESPN Deportes. Three new high-definition services from Disney and ESPN Media Networks--ABC Family HD, Disney Channel HD and ESPNEWS HD-will launch in Time Warner Cable systems when they become available in 2008.

The companies have also agreed to make available certain shows from some of the networks on Time Warner Cable's Start Over platform. The Start Over functionality gives Time Warner Cable digital cable subscribers in some areas the ability to restart certain live programs, which are in progress, without any preplanning or in-home recording devices. Customers who have joined a Start Over-enabled program in progress are able to replay the program from the beginning, but cannot fast forward.

The Walt Disney Company will also provide content from certain networks to Time Warner Cable's Quick Clips platform. The Quick Clips service provides a range of short-form content that is relevant to the underlying network shows. The clips are typically 2-10 minutes in length and are intended to provide additional video for a specific program, or real-time updates to a program in progress. Both the Start Over and Quick Clips features are available to Time Warner Cable's digital cable subscribers at no additional charge.

Co-chairs of Disney Media Networks George Bodenheimer and Anne Sweeney commented on the announcement. Sweeney, president of Disney-ABC Television Group, said, "This milestone agreement combines Disney's world-renowned brands with Time Warner Cable's outstanding distribution platforms throughout the country." Bodenheimer, president of ESPN and ABC Sports, added, "Together, The Walt Disney Company and Time Warner Cable will provide leading sports, family, news and entertainment content for a fantastic and diverse consumer experience."

"This agreement will give our customers access to an even wider array of sports and high-definition programming," said Glenn Britt, President and CEO of Time Warner Cable. "It will also allow us to expand our Start Over and Quick Clips services. Start Over has proven to be one of the most attractive advanced video features we've ever offered."

Also for that member from Palm Desert, Plz just bare with us!! it is coming soon!!

toadfannc

04-20-07, 07:33 AM

Hey guys almost forgot to add this!! some news i got in the company email!!

Publish Date: 04/13/2007

TIME WARNER CABLE AND THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY ANNOUNCE DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS FOR CARRIAGE OF
DISNEY AND ESPN MEDIA NETWORKS' PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

____________________________________________________________ ____

Hey, good to see that TWC employees are finding out about this about a month after the rest of the world did. Dude ... you just illustrated what so many on this forum complain about constantly-- that TWC is clueless.

John Mason

04-20-07, 10:44 AM

feel free guys to gimme more questions!! I wanna help explain anything I can!!
Nice to have you aboard, cableguy101. Suggest ignoring some of the excessively saucy comments and chipping in when you have inside or just general material. It all helps. -- John

Rich in ILM

04-20-07, 10:58 AM

[I]

____________________________________________________________ ____

Hey, good to see that TWC employees are finding out about this about a month after the rest of the world did. Dude ... you just illustrated what so many on this forum complain about constantly-- that TWC is clueless.

And a post like this accomplishes what?

People try to help with understanding and we slap them around? How does that help?

archiguy

04-20-07, 11:19 AM

What I don't really understand is why TWC "don't want to use Aptiv no more"...? Those guys know what they're doing and how to write bulletproof software (Passport Echo) for the hardware platform (the SA boxes and DVR) that TWC has chosen to deploy.

Seems to me that outsourcing SDV to the guys at Aptiv would get that function integrated into Passport quickly and properly, and would end up saving TWC a ton of money in the long run. Not to mention keeping their customers happy, which one would think would be the main idea. Navigator has been a colossal bust thusfar, and TWC may end up crawling back to Aptiv begging them to fix this mess. And it would serve 'em right.

If a loved one needed brain surgery, I wouldn't tell the best brain surgeon in town that I'm dismissing him from the case because, you know, I can learn how to do this myself, thankewverymuch. Perhaps not the best example, but TWC's problems with Navigator seem kind of like that.

AndyHDTV

04-20-07, 11:34 AM

skylab

04-20-07, 11:49 AM

Cableguy,

Some of us prefer cablecards to those clunky boxes that don't work right for firewire recording of HD channels. Will TWC continue to support cablecards for future HD content? When will the cablecard equipped STBs appear (as required by the integration ban)?

Weaselboy

04-20-07, 11:57 AM

Cableguy101> Thanks for posting and I apreciate your info. Most of us realize you are a TW employee and only sharing what you see going on in the company. Too bad some of the bashers have to treat you as the head of the damn company or something like you are personally responsible for the way TW does business.

Any idea when Desert Cities RR will see the 10/1 speeds you mentioned?

davehancock

04-20-07, 12:03 PM

wow yea, I didnt expect to get hammered by Hancock, i am just trying to relay some info. But yeah thanx Bernie for making me feel welcomed!!I guess that I got a bit carried away and agree that we should welcome you. But, there was just a bit too much of (typical TW) misinformation in your post (and in your reply too). Just sounds like he is a angry customer or something, cant help you there... anyways to answer his wordsActually, I am a log time TW customer with a bill of $180/month. Further, I use my REAL NAME and anyone can find me in the phone book. So I am not hiding. But I do not react well to mis-information, so sorry if I got a bit carried away. However, let's discuss a bit of the inaccurate information that is being passed on.
SDV is not going to be implemented yet for awhile, but will be in the future, and it does to have to do with adding channels, since you willneed a selected amount of bandwith to send everything to the box and not rely on the box switching freqs. like it does now to tune a channel in.You didn't answer the question of what IPTV is. Were we correct in assuming that you really meant SDV? By the way: The IPTV that I know, is a technology that is further off "for delivering video to STBs using Internet Protocol. It is the next generation (beyond SDV) thing. It requires all new STBs - so using it is not simply a matter of putting some new software in existing customer STBs.
We cant add more channel on our system (Palm Springs) yet because we have no more bandwith. To get more bandwith we need to eliminate some more analog channels. 1 analog channel takes up the bandwith that we can put 12 digital channels on. The problem isnt adding channels in that bandwith but having a lot of non digital customers, that can tune in the analog channel, complain about a certain channel they were able to watch being gone now and they cant watch it no more...I think that we all understand that issue.
I guess it would allow TWC to push and sell the digital box for only 7 dollars or so more a month but most people dont wanna pay more money!! so thats the problem, kinda like a equalizer, one take away a channel for a lot of non-digital customers to add a lot of channels for digital customers!!So, I have 8 TV's in my house - 7 are analog with no cable box (direct connection), probably by the time of the shut off, one more will be HD (connected using a built-in QAM tuner) - so am I supposed to rent 6 boxes @$7/month? I think not!
we want to do it slowly so then eventually in 2 years when there is no more analog, we dont have to worry.A bit of news for you - the FCC plans to issue regulations requiring you (cable) to downconvert to analog any qualified local digital station that you carry until YOU had transitioned to all-digital:
FCC Tees Up Dual-Carriage Plan (http://multichannel.com/article/CA6434962.html) so you still have to worry - some. Of course, you can go right ahead and eliminate QVC, etc. right now.
Also as far as having Aptive add the capability to do SDV; we are trying to get away from Aptive and go with Mystro( The TWC version of Passport so we dont have to pay Aptive for it and we can control more of the options).Ahh - my point! The issue is that you don't want to PAY Aptiv. So don't say the reason that you are doing Navigator is that you want to add features when the reason is that you don't want to pay your current SW vendor to do it! (The reason that I am so angry about this is that the TW manager in Lincoln NE blamed the switch to Navigator on entirely false perceptions - that FCC had mandated it! TW management has a habit of passing out a lot of misinformation!)
We are only BETA testing the new Mystro Navigator, Not SDV. Mystro navigator is only available to employee boxes right now. Also to, you are in NE, not CA, so theres a big difference!! So be quiet :eek: :eek: Actually, this is not a local thread. It has mostly dealt with national issues. The technology issues are really national. Also, I am not in NE (read my location) - I'm in Rochester NY with TW on SARA. But I am well aware of TW's plans for Navigator and how badly that they have botched the job. And then to have some anonymous TW person talk about how that POS software is the "salvation" of bandwidth issues - well, it sort of sets me off. I'll leave further discussion of the Navigator fiasco to that thread: Time Warner Cable Navigator (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=723830&page=1)
You are right, I havent dealt with SDV yet, And we arent going to add it and try it anytime soon from Aptive, like i said, we dont wanna use Aptive no More!!You might want to revisit this statement after checking the above thread.
I got my information from the source, and it is straight! Besides you are in NE so I cant talk for TWC there!!Like I said, I'm in Rochester, NY and this is a national thread.
Yes bandwith issues could still exsist, but not near as bad as they do today!! In 2 years, analog will be gone anyway and the bandwith is going back to the government, which sucks. They should leave half of it still for Cable companies to use.????????What does broadcast spectrum space have to do with cable spectrum? Nothing.
One analog channel equals 12 digital channels or 3 HD channels.Actually, if you cram 3 HD channels into a single 256QAM then you are bitrate limiting the HD channel (one HD channel uses about 18Mbps, a QAM channel has 38.8Mbps capacity. While 2 HD channels fit, you have to reduce the bit rate of 3HD channels to just under 13Mbps to fit in a QAM. I care about QUALITY, so 3HD in a QAM is BAD (to me).

At this point, it is probably hard to believe - but I am really not trying to dump on you. But I strongly suspect that the information that you have passed on is some sort of "pre-filtered", PR put out by TW management. I'd really appreciate some meaningful dialog with TW people who are in a position to know - or say that they don't know". There has been ONE person (DianaTWCSC) who has, in the past, contributed to the discussion. But apparently corporate pressures (her time) have limited her recent participation.

Peace :)

JayPSU

04-20-07, 01:49 PM

AndyHDTV

04-20-07, 02:51 PM

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6435282.html

Cable Operator Claims It Has Bandwidth for 100 HD Channels
By Todd Spangler -- Multichannel News, 4/20/2007 12:02:00 PM
Time Warner Cable last month completed an analog-reclamation project in its Staten Island, N.Y., system that freed up enough bandwidth for 100 HD channels.

Director of corporate communications Maureen Huff confirmed that the project was completed in March, but she did not provide the number of channels retired from the analog tier. Huff added that 1.1 million of Time Warner’s 1.4 million customers in the New York/New Jersey region subscribe to digital cable.

The project’s disclosure was buried in court documents Time Warner Cable filed as part of its false-advertising lawsuit against DirecTV.The cable operator was attempting to demonstrate that it was able to match DirecTV’s capacity claims by pointing to the Staten Island analog-reclamation project.

Senior network engineer Ron Boyer, in a declaration dated March 4, described the Staten Island project as expected to yield enough bandwidth to carry as many as 100 new HD channels. “TWC is not limited to approximately 30 HD channels, even in the near-term, because it may readily redeploy some of its existing bandwidth to accommodate more HD channels,” he said.

However, U.S. District Court Judge Laura Taylor Swain, in denying Time Warner Cable’s request for an injunction blocking DirecTV’s HD ads, noted, “TWC was unable to state affirmatively that the reclaimed bandwidth [in Staten Island] would be used for increasing HD capacity, as opposed to other uses.”

Boyer’s reference to 100 HD channels indicated that the Staten Island system -- which serves an estimated 100,000 subscribers, according to research firm Backchannelmedia -- ceased broadcasting at least 30, and perhaps as many as 40, analog channels.

The project mirrored a similar migration underway by Comcast in Chicago, where some number of the area’s 1.8 million subscribers will be forced to install Motorola set-tops by July 1 to continue receiving the expanded-basic channel lineup.

Comcast has said that a “distinct minority” of subscribers are affected. In Chicago, Comcast is eliminating 38 channels but keeping a basic 34-channel analog tier that comprises local broadcast, public, educational and government channels and a smattering of others.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6435282.html

skylab

04-20-07, 03:26 PM

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6435282.html

The project mirrored a similar migration underway by Comcast in Chicago, where some number of the area’s 1.8 million subscribers will be forced to install Motorola set-tops by July 1 to continue receiving the expanded-basic channel lineup.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6435282.html

The more I think about Comcast's move, the smarter it looks to me. First, it solves the bandwidth problems for the forseeable future. Second, with the impending July 1, 2007 "integration ban" requiring the use of cablecards in all new set top boxes, the move effectively uses up the remaining (and, for now, cheaper) set top boxes that do not comply with the ban. TWC, pelase take note and get moving.

HDTV Dude

04-20-07, 03:31 PM

AndyHDTV

04-20-07, 03:43 PM

Stan54

04-20-07, 07:32 PM

Thanks to this thread, I called Time Warner and got $15 per month removed from my monthly bill.

Berk32

04-20-07, 07:38 PM

Thanks to this thread, I called Time Warner and got $15 per month removed from my monthly bill.

Care to elaborate a little? I'm sure we'd all like to here the details

Harley_Dude

04-20-07, 10:02 PM

How many markets are carrying their MyTV affiliate in HD? San Antonio's KMYS My 35 showed up in the channel guide this evening on channel 107. Now we just need to get something going for the CW.

jjallou

04-20-07, 11:55 PM

How many markets are carrying their MyTV affiliate in HD? San Antonio's KMYS My 35 showed up in the channel guide this evening on channel 107. Now we just need to get something going for the CW.

Still waiting in Milwaukee for the two Sinclair stations to be added. CW18 and My24.
Oh wait did I say the word "added", that's not in the TWC dictionary. At least I can get them OTA. The Hawaiin Tropic Pageant and Ujena Bikini Jam is on next Tuesday on Mynetworktv. :D

IndifferentBozo

04-21-07, 12:57 AM

How can I get in touch w/ someone who knows about programing, specifically Center Ice in HD, Versus-HD and local channels in HD (KTLA-HD in the South Bay, Los Angeles County). Customer Service reps do not have the answers. Thanks... :)

I'd like the same information for Center Ice in HD and VS HD for the Austin TWC. HD hockey spoils you for sd versions, especially when they keep saying during the SD broadcast that the game is available in HD.

Nice to see they will be adding ESPN2 HD and ESPN news HD in 2008 though...buh (really? ESPN news?)

Who do I talk to in order to get FIOS in Austin..)

twelvepbrs

04-21-07, 01:15 AM

I'd like the same information for Center Ice in HD and VS HD for the Austin TWC. HD hockey spoils you for sd versions, especially when they keep saying during the SD broadcast that the game is available in HD.

Nice to see they will be adding ESPN2 HD and ESPN news HD in 2008 though...buh (really? ESPN news?)

Who do I talk to in order to get FIOS in Austin..)
ESPN news in HD might be kind of neat in 2008, i mean by then most sporting events will be covered in HD, so it'd be cool to have all the clips in HD
...
also anyone know what the hell is going on with ESPN2HD? it's rumored to be available to a lot more people these days, and i checked their schedule and they don't have a single MLB game in the next two weeks, wtf? and howcome there's no MLB games on INHD like last year?!?!?!

cableguy101

04-21-07, 07:36 AM

I appreciate the reply Dave, I am just trying to help out with what I am told and what i actually know... I aint no VP or GM or hell, CEO, Although I would like to be!! All those old guys dont know what should and needs to be done like us younger kids who have watched TV and know what should be what and etc... Let me get in there and spend the money that should be spent on Upgrading systems to 1Gig, and then there would be no problems for bandwith!! then on top of that, Get every channel I could in HD so people could have the channels in HD. Not only that, get the channel on like the day its launched!! I remember when INHD was launched with INHD2, TW didnt put the channel on till late down the road, now they finally have it, if it were me, i would had it on the day of or the next day of when it was launched.. And I will be honest with you... I think TWC could do a lot better than what they are doing now... as far as hiring quality people to provide awesome Customer Service... actually hiring good technicians that can do the job right the first time and not have T/Cs all the time and etc. And also, TWC should also buy their technicians the quality tools they need to get the job done faster, instead of making things that are old and wearing out work until they fall apart. But yeah!! correction, I said 3 HD channels equals one analog, I meant to say 2 Channels, that 3 and 2 or so clost together on my laptop, my bad!!

So, I have 8 TV's in my house - 7 are analog with no cable box (direct connection), probably by the time of the shut off, one more will be HD (connected using a built-in QAM tuner) - so am I supposed to rent 6 boxes @$7/month? I think not!

Well by then I hear TWC wants to employ some new technology already availiable that will allow you to have 1 DVR or HD DVR power up to 2 or maybe 3 Tvs, kinda like what dish has right now with their receivers. you would have the main TV and then somehow the boxes with their dual or triple tuners, have a way to get a signal to the other tvs. Dont quote me on that, it works something to that affect. So you wont need a box for every TV, but by then you are gonna wanna have all HDTVs now anyways. The stores dont even sell a TV anymore without a Digital QAM tuner already on it!!

A bit of news for you - the FCC plans to issue regulations requiring you (cable) to downconvert to analog any qualified local digital station that you carry until YOU had transitioned to all-digital:

Actually, we are 95% digital out here in Palm Springs already with all local Networks in HD and digital. They are about 5 channels that are not digital, and that is about to go to 4 since CW is now back on the air for TWC as of this morning.

Anyways, I gotta go right now, I jsut got called out to an outage in Desert Hot Springs for a fire that has potentially burned the Fiber, DHS was Adelphia, crappy system!!... lates

Stan54

04-21-07, 11:47 AM

Care to elaborate a little? I'm sure we'd all like to here the details

Just a few pages ago, someone told how he got his bill reduced so I tried the same thing and it worked. I am in a former Adelphia area. Time Warner came in and it was business as usual. Thanks to what I saw here, I called in and said that I had seen on the internet that Time Warner might offer lower rates for what I had in service. (classic analog 2 - 74 and 17 HD channels via $1.75 cablecard and internet) They checked and said they could knock $15 off my monthly rate. Considering that is $180 per year, I am quite pleased.

Not long after I purchased my HD tv about 16 months ago, a person posted on the forum that Sears was having a sale on the set I had purchased, so I went in and ended up with an $800 (with 10% penalties) refund to my credit card. Not bad for just reading the forum.

Riverside_Guy

04-21-07, 12:00 PM

It just goes to show.... They won't drop analog channels to add more HD channels for their customers but they'll do it just to prove a point to the competition.

Well, the folks in SI sure as hell are customers! Still, giving 5% of the city 3 new HD channels and jacking the rest sure as hell is an insult. The rest of us should deduct 5 bucks from our bills until the whole city gets the same lineup of channels!

davehancock

04-21-07, 12:04 PM

I appreciate the reply Dave, I am just trying to help out with what I am told and what i actually know... Glad to get this on the right level. Lets continue in that vain. :)

I don't work for cable, but have been keeping up with the technology.

Let me get in there and spend the money that should be spent on Upgrading systems to 1Gig, and then there would be no problems for bandwith!! I'm not sure that 1Gig is the total answer either. The demand for higher bit rate is expanding greatly.

then on top of that, Get every channel I could in HD so people could have the channels in HD. Not only that, get the channel on like the day its launched!! We all are with you there! The problem is that there are not (yet) that many HD channels to be had - but everyone does seem to be getting on the HD train!

And I will be honest with you... I think TWC could do a lot better than what they are doing now... as far as hiring quality people to provide awesome Customer Service... actually hiring good technicians that can do the job right the first time and not have T/Cs all the time and etc. And also, TWC should also buy their technicians the quality tools they need to get the job done faster, instead of making things that are old and wearing out work until they fall apart. I take it that your job is a field tech? Actually, I think that TW is better in the field support area than the others. Two of our kids live in Comcast areas (Montgomery County Maryland & Atlanta) and they have had nothing but trouble with the Comcast field people. A lot of the problem is that Comcast tends to use sub-contractors, where the people are paid by the job and are encouraged to move on to the next one - not to make sure the installation is correct, or make sure that there are no other problems. TW field people here are great and making sure that things are right is what they are all about. Hell, even the dish companies around here do a poor job of installations.

But yeah!! correction, I said 3 HD channels equals one analog, I meant to say 2 Channels, that 3 and 2 or so clost together on my laptop, my bad!!Actually, I didn't think you made a mistake - cause some cable companies DO put 3 HDs on one QAM! :eek: Besides being on a campaign to see that the correct info gets out there - I tend to rail against things that reduce picture quality. Personally, I prefer to see SDV over 3 HD on a QAM. Glad to see that your system is doing only 2. I think that, by in large, TW is sticking to 2 (using 3 to a QAM is sort of equivalent to "HD-Lite" at DirecTV :rolleyes: ).

Well by then I hear TWC wants to employ some new technology already availiable that will allow you to have 1 DVR or HD DVR power up to 2 or maybe 3 Tvs, kinda like what dish has right now with their receivers. you would have the main TV and then somehow the boxes with their dual or triple tuners, have a way to get a signal to the other tvs. Dont quote me on that, it works something to that affect. So you wont need a box for every TV, but by then you are gonna wanna have all HDTVs now anyways.Well there are a couple of things that you could be talking about here (I really think that it is a combination of these):
1) MR DVR: There have been systems developed (with limited deployment) that use a central DVR as an "entertainment server". This scheme requires that each of the TVs in the house that use this have a STB. The server outputs SD RF (with stereo) on special frequencies, which are received by the remote STBs. Scientific Atlanta has had the SA8300MR for some time now, but few cable systems have deployed it. I believe that there are Motorola/Moxi units too.
2) There is another technology (don't recall the company behind it right now - but I do know that TW has invested heavily in it) where all channels are digital and a box at the cable entrance to the home converts all the digital channels to analog SD. This allows the network efficiency of 100% digital, and yet allows the household to remain analog. I don't know how my situation would be handled - but I assume that I would have to run the analog sets to the converter, and the digital sets directly to the cable in.

The stores dont even sell a TV anymore without a Digital QAM tuner already on it!!That's really not true - but there are fewer CableCard sets. Actually, a lot of the low cost (less than $1,000) LCD sets actually have a QAM tuner - but neither advertise it, nor mention it in their directions! CableCard, is really in an awkward place right now - no two way communications, so no SDV, no "on Demand", etc. Example: Sony SXRD series. The A2020 has a QAM tuner, but no CableCard; but the full featured XBR2 has a CableCard. And then how does the cable installer handle a QAM only set? Some of those take an hour just to do a set-up scan, and then you have to spend another hour deleting the "junk". Others are much more straight-forward. Question: How are your techs supposed to handle these?

Actually, we are 95% digital out here in Palm Springs already with all local Networks in HD and digital. They are about 5 channels that are not digital, and that is about to go to 4 since CW is now back on the air for TWC as of this morning.I think that is fairly typical - I believe that our TW system only has 3 channels not being simulcast. But the problem is what to do about the analog only sets (my other 8 sets)? The answer probably is my item 2, above - except I haven't heard much about that lately. However, the probable FCC action, will require that the local OTA stations be carried in downconverted analog SD versions until cable provides every set with conversion capability. This ALL will be interesting!

Riverside_Guy

04-21-07, 12:09 PM

Nice to have you aboard, cableguy101. Suggest ignoring some of the excessively saucy comments and chipping in when you have inside or just general material. It all helps. -- John

Well, Dave had some issues with misstatements of fact coming from someone who should know better. What REALLY jumped out at me was the statement that cable bandwidth won't be an issue in 2 years because of the elimination of analog... obviously confusing the broadcast elimination of analog with the fact that it in no way has anything to do with cable companies eliminating the analog channels they send out their wires.

Oops, I posted this before I read the rest of the thread where some issues of fact got cleared up. Still I think some may leap to the conclusion all analog cable channels will be eliminated in 2 years...

Riverside_Guy

04-21-07, 12:12 PM

yeah that's nuts. DirecTV said they would provide 100 HD channel to "ALL" their subcribers.
TWC just proved that they did it in S.I. and could provide just S.I. with 100 HD channels.

DirecTV will do it & TWC could and might do it.

And we already have felt the consequences, SI gets 3 new HD channels, the rest of the city gets jacked. And no mention of any plans to eliminate any analog channels in the rest of the city.

I realize that this is an issue only NYers may really care about, but it sure is an examploe of what decisions TWC makes.

twelvepbrs

04-21-07, 12:39 PM

And we already have felt the consequences, SI gets 3 new HD channels, the rest of the city gets jacked. And no mention of any plans to eliminate any analog channels in the rest of the city.

I realize that this is an issue only NYers may really care about, but it sure is an examploe of what decisions TWC makes.
maybe D* will make a anti-TWC commercial that asks if you live in SI (staten island?) i hope their negative advertising really degrades until they look like political adds, with grainy black/white footage, and evil sounding music in the background, and questions at the end of each commercial like "You don't hate children, do you?"

DAK333

04-21-07, 05:47 PM

twelvepbrs

04-21-07, 07:51 PM

You would think NYC would be ahead of the game when it comes to this stuff.

I hate Time Warner.
why NYC be ahead of the game? in fact for that matter why would any TWC area be ahead of anything except for the bronze age

Rich in ILM

04-21-07, 08:02 PM

why NYC be ahead of the game? in fact for that matter why would any TWC area be ahead of anything except for the bronze age

TW seems to be amking the classic mistake of way too many businesses. They will term it to be "optimizing" their return.

The tragedy is they forget is that all "return" comes from a customer. Great businesses really focus on their customer the rest fake it and get the return they deserve.

Marc Alexander

04-21-07, 11:40 PM

Actually, I didn't think you made a mistake - cause some cable companies DO put 3 HDs on one QAM! :eek:
TWC Los Angeles has been putting 3 HDs per QAM for over a year now (I believe some Charter areas actually squeeze 4!!). At one point I was about to move back to E*. However, slowly they have been freeing up bandwidth by moving basic channels out of analog over to digital. PQ has been steadily increasing as they add channels. I noticed we now have ESPN2 HD as of Friday. TWC LA gives me every HD channel I desire with the exception of National Geographic (which I get via E* at my parents' house).

I have had just about every cable provider there is over the last 5 years (Comcast, Mediacom, Charter, and TWC...with Charter being the absolute worst). TWC hands down has the best field technitions from my experience.

gparris

04-22-07, 11:17 AM

Still waiting in Milwaukee for the two Sinclair stations to be added. CW18 and My24.
Oh wait did I say the word "added", that's not in the TWC dictionary. At least I can get them OTA. The Hawaiin Tropic Pageant and Ujena Bikini Jam is on next Tuesday on Mynetworktv. :D

You are SO right about this adding thing.
Good ol' Bev Greenburg at TWC - Milwaukee was supposedly going to meet with Sinclair station owners for getting those HD/digital signals on the TWC grid (CWHD and MyNtwkHD) back in what...January as reported in the Milwaukee JS paper?
You see how TWC likes to fool people with such lies and deceptions...she is "EXHIBIT A" for such goings on, at least in our TWC location.
BTW, I cannot get either OTA signal from my location (near the border) as I am surrounded by houses on a hill in front of the signal.
Now honestly, why should I have to resort to OTA (a TWC CSR's suggestion) when I am paying TWC for HD service already? :eek:
TWC-Milwaukee just does not "get it".
Good for San Antonio and other locations like NYC that have all their HD locals (as I count them) vs. our "some" (though TWC used to advertise the offered "them all"-remember that , jjallou?) :mad:
Heck, I am still waiting for my CinemaxHD and StarzHD and I subscribe to both in SD, too, while we're at it, Bev.

AndyHDTV

04-22-07, 02:25 PM

this is all the info I have now.

Future HD channels update

The Movie Channel-HD - is done, supposedly
Food Network-HD - in negotiations
HGTV-HD - in negotiations
Lifetime Movie Network-HD - in negotiations
NFL Network-HD - in negotiations
Outdoor Channel 2-HD – is not in the works

Known Deals Done

HBO-HD
Cinemax-HD
Showtime-HD
Starz-HD
ESPN-HD
ESPN2-HD
HDNet
HDNet Movies
INHD
Universal-HD
TNT-HD
Discovery-HD
MHD
A&E-HD
WealthTV-HD - Currently TWC has a deal only for HD-VOD content & only in San Antonio
Golf/Versus-HD - Has the rights to as of 4/1/07, but has not yet added.
National Geographic-HD - has been added only in TWC of Hawaii
Sleuth-HD - Has the rights to, but has not yet added.
ESPN News-HD - coming to TWC in 2008
Disney Channel-HD - coming to TWC in 2008
ABC Family-HD - coming to TWC in 2008

Negotiations Unknown

Chiller-HD
Sci-Fi-HD
USA-HD
Bravo-HD
History-HD
TBS-HD
CNN-HD
CartoonNet-HD
TheWeatherChannel-HD
FX-HD
Speed-HD
Smithsonian-HD
BBC-HD
Al Jazeera-HD
MGM-HD
Big Ten Network-HD
Vatican-HD
The Tennis Channel-HD
TBN-HD
IFC-HD
Toon Disney-HD
MSNBC-HD

VOOM Channels
Rave HD
Equator HD
Gallery HD
Animania HD
Rush HD
Ultra HD
Guy TV HD
Majestic HD
Monsters HD
HD News
Film Fest HD
Kung Fu HD
WorldSport HD
World Cinema HD
Gameplay HD
Family Room HD
Treasure HD

JayPSU

04-22-07, 03:18 PM

this is all the info I have now.

Future HD channels update

The Movie Channel-HD - is done, supposedly
Food Network-HD - in negotiations
HGTV-HD - in negotiations
Lifetime Movie Network-HD - in negotiations
NFL Network-HD - in negotiations
Outdoor Channel 2-HD – is not in the works

Known Deals Done

HBO-HD
Cinemax-HD
Showtime-HD
Starz-HD
ESPN-HD
ESPN2-HD
HDNet
HDNet Movies
INHD
Universal-HD
TNT-HD
Discovery-HD
MHD
A&E-HD
WealthTV-HD - Currently TWC has a deal only for HD-VOD content & only in San Antonio
Golf/Versus-HD - Has the rights to as of 4/1/07, but has not yet added.
National Geographic-HD - has been added only in TWC of Hawaii
Sleuth-HD - Has the rights to, but has not yet added.
ESPN News-HD - coming to TWC in 2008
Disney Channel-HD - coming to TWC in 2008
ABC Family-HD - coming to TWC in 2008

And yet no TMC, Starz, Cinemax, MHD, A&E, Versus, NG, or Sleuth in HD out here in TWC Columbus. I hate TWC, bunch of thieves.

twelvepbrs

04-22-07, 03:24 PM

And yet no TMC, Starz, Cinemax, MHD, A&E, Versus, NG, or Sleuth in HD out here in TWC Columbus. I hate TWC, bunch of thieves.
it'd be great if they had alacarte pricing, i mean i really only watch about four of the SD channels, so i'm not a big fan of having to shell out $40/month for the rest of them, but i wouldn't mind paying for individual HD channels, also not a fan of paying $5/month for ESPNHD, INHD, HDNet, MHD, DiscoveryHD, when all i really want is ESPNHD

dc10forlife

04-22-07, 07:56 PM

it'd be great if they had alacarte pricing, i mean i really only watch about four of the SD channels, so i'm not a big fan of having to shell out $40/month for the rest of them, but i wouldn't mind paying for individual HD channels, also not a fan of paying $5/month for ESPNHD, INHD, HDNet, MHD, DiscoveryHD, when all i really want is ESPNHD

I could care less about the SD channels too. My local TWC allows a "limited + HD tier" service. I get channels 2-25 (locals+shopping - 7.95/mo.) plus the HD tier (6.95/mo.). Tack on a guide fee plus a fee for the box and cablecard. Not ala carte but close enough.

cableguy101

04-23-07, 01:48 AM

And yet no TMC, Starz, Cinemax, MHD, A&E, Versus, NG, or Sleuth in HD out here in TWC Columbus. I hate TWC, bunch of thieves.

Dude, the list has TMC as the first thing listed. It is ready to go, just not in the channel lineup!

Also for all you complaining about not getting ur channels and etc... Its not as easy as just getting the rights to the channel and then putting it on the air right away, there is time involved to receive the programming though the sateliite, then the process of headend techs to get another receiver set up for that satellite received channel then taking that channel and modulating it to QAM and frequency, and if there is no bandwith at the time for another QAM frequency, they have to figure out which analog channel or something to remove to make room. And if its a analog channel, there has to be fair warning in advance to all customers to let them know of the channel or channels being removed and explain why it is being removed like to make it digital box only accessible and that they need to eliminate it to make room for more new HD and digital channels. I am kinda speaking for the company but I am also speaking for myself since i work there and have learned what goes and on in the process of adding channels. You need to give it time. Some divisions are quicker than others and thats why some divisions may have it before anyone else does. Some divisions also may not have a bandwith problem like most do and are able to make room for QAM frequencies to be added and it goes quick, and also some divisions are also so large in size, that they may also need to find the room to put the channels and extra equipment in the headend etc... so jsut wait for it to be done!!

bernie33

04-23-07, 02:00 AM

VisionOn

04-23-07, 02:08 AM

so jsut wait for it to be done!!

some of us like TWC Columbus have been waiting for "it to be done" for over two years. Which is why TWC Raleigh is still waiting for TMC, Starz, Cinemax, A&E, Versus, NG, and Sleuth in HD as well.

That's more than enough time to boost infrastructure and allocate channel space. Especially when they can drop CW and MNTV HD feeds in after a month of sealing a Sinclair deal.

There's no such thing as "ready to go" with TWC.

And if its a analog channel, there has to be fair warning in advance to all customers to let them know of the channel or channels being removed and explain why it is being removed like to make it digital box only accessible and that they need to eliminate it to make room for more new HD and digital channels.

and in case you haven't been paying attention, Adelphia customers are only too familiar with the fact that TWC do not need to give fair warning.

AndyHDTV

04-23-07, 03:26 AM

let's keep thinking of questions for cableguy, we really appreciate his input.
at the same time I think he could learn something as well.

their are systems out there that hasn't seen a added HD channel in over a year.
please understand some of our frustrations.

But we will all wait, we will spend most of our time outside enjoying the rest of spring and the whole of summer and then turn back on our HD sets in the fall to find that DirecTV has 100+ HD channels and TWC has probably 20.

ENDContra

04-23-07, 06:11 AM

Also for all you complaining about not getting ur channels and etc... Its not as easy as just getting the rights to the channel and then putting it on the air right away, there is time involved to receive the programming though the sateliite, then the process of headend techs to get another receiver set up for that satellite received channel then taking that channel and modulating it to QAM and frequency, and if there is no bandwith at the time for another QAM frequency, they have to figure out which analog channel or something to remove to make room.
I think some of these things can and have been done prior to deals being made. I do recall that the day TWC announced a deal for ESPNHD, it was online that night. The problem is, the local TWC office rarely knows whats going on with corporate...they often find out about carriage agreements at the same time or after we do. If this was being handled properly, the local office would be doing a lot of this work while corporate is finishing up the details on carriage agreements, so that when the deal is finalized and announced, the local office can add it shortly thereafter.

As far as bandwidth, maybe Raleigh is maxxed out, I dont know (although ESPN2HD has been unwatchable from breakups on more than one occasion, if thats a sign of anything), but its frustrating when deals are made and then nothing happens.

RafaelSmith

04-23-07, 09:06 AM

Hello,

I live in Orlando and have Brighthouse HD cable service...im pretty sure they are involved with time-warner somehow since my internet shows up as time-warner.

Not sure about all the details about adding new channels and such but we definately need more HD channels in the lineup....

I would love a ala-carte system....I literally never watch 75% of the SD crap available on digital cable.

aBlueSky

04-23-07, 09:36 AM

l their are systems out there that hasn't seen a added HD channel in over a year.
please understand some of our frustrations.

The system CableGuy works @, TWC Desert Cities, is one of those systems. We did get Universal HD, but this was only when INHD2 was eliminated. It has been several years since anything was added. I believe the last HD channel that was added may have the local FOX or ABC affiliate.

Anyway, it has been a little frustrating...

JayPSU

04-23-07, 09:45 AM

Dude, the list has TMC as the first thing listed. It is ready to go, just not in the channel lineup!

Also for all you complaining about not getting ur channels and etc... Its not as easy as just getting the rights to the channel and then putting it on the air right away, there is time involved to receive the programming though the sateliite, then the process of headend techs to get another receiver set up for that satellite received channel then taking that channel and modulating it to QAM and frequency, and if there is no bandwith at the time for another QAM frequency, they have to figure out which analog channel or something to remove to make room. And if its a analog channel, there has to be fair warning in advance to all customers to let them know of the channel or channels being removed and explain why it is being removed like to make it digital box only accessible and that they need to eliminate it to make room for more new HD and digital channels. I am kinda speaking for the company but I am also speaking for myself since i work there and have learned what goes and on in the process of adding channels. You need to give it time. Some divisions are quicker than others and thats why some divisions may have it before anyone else does. Some divisions also may not have a bandwith problem like most do and are able to make room for QAM frequencies to be added and it goes quick, and also some divisions are also so large in size, that they may also need to find the room to put the channels and extra equipment in the headend etc... so jsut wait for it to be done!!

Oh please. Look, I appreciate the fact that you have taken time to answer our questions and address our concerns, but this is ridiculous. TWC has had deals in place for Cinemax and Starz HD for more than a year now and STILL we don't have these. We're paying for these channels and yet we do not have them. TWC is a major, MAJOR company and yet they fall desperately short of the comparable cable company, Comcast. I am so sick and tired of the excuses. You don't see Comcast with such a pathetic HD lineup, and yet, TWC charges just as much! Unacceptable! There is so much crap that could be cut out of the lineup to add the HD channels that we're ALREADY paying for. THIS is why people are looking to jump-ship from TWC and are looking at DishTV, Directv (if they make good on their 100 HD channel promise), and even U-verse. We're tired of the lame excuses, while watching Comcast completely blowing us away. I'm done.

jkurlanski

04-23-07, 10:29 AM

Oh please. Look, I appreciate the fact that you have taken time to answer our questions and address our concerns, but this is ridiculous. TWC has had deals in place for Cinemax and Starz HD for more than a year now and STILL we don't have these. We're paying for these channels and yet we do not have them. TWC is a major, MAJOR company and yet they fall desperately short of the comparable cable company, Comcast. I am so sick and tired of the excuses. You don't see Comcast with such a pathetic HD lineup, and yet, TWC charges just as much! Unacceptable! There is so much crap that could be cut out of the lineup to add the HD channels that we're ALREADY paying for. THIS is why people are looking to jump-ship from TWC and are looking at DishTV, Directv (if they make good on their 100 HD channel promise), and even U-verse. We're tired of the lame excuses, while watching Comcast completely blowing us away. I'm done.
I think its an important distinction that the problems you are describing reflect the TWC franchise in Columbus, OH. They are not true of all TWC areas. That being said, the TWC franchise in Columbus does seem woefully behind.

Harley_Dude

04-23-07, 11:55 AM

I think its an important distinction that the problems you are describing reflect the TWC franchise in Columbus, OH. They are not true of all TWC areas. That being said, the TWC franchise in Columbus does seem woefully behind.

Agreed. I think the franchise in San Antonio is light years ahead of Columbus, OH. It has been pointed out many times that the people who need to be taken to task over this are the local executives and not the occasional TWC employee from another part of the country that tries to help provide information from inside his or her area of expertise.

twelvepbrs

04-23-07, 12:24 PM

Agreed. I think the franchise in San Antonio is light years ahead of Columbus, OH. It has been pointed out many times that the people who need to be taken to task over this are the local executives and not the occasional TWC employee from another part of the country that tries to help provide information from inside his or her area of expertise.
it's been said before, but the bit problem is that TWC in most (not all) areas just doesn't give two sh*t's and a f*ck about it's customers, everyonce in a while they throw us a bone, just make the hassle of switching to another provider seem just barely not worth it, or sometimes the bone is in response to a big move by TWC's competitors, but none of the moves by TWC are ever an attempt to take care of us as customers and keep us happy, many corporations are very successful because they are truly dedicated to their customers, TWC is NOT one of them because they are only interested in their bottom line, they should focus on their customers and i think they would be pleasantly surprised that providing excellent service with real value will make their bottom line grow faster and more reliably than any other move...

davehancock

04-23-07, 01:31 PM

There is so much crap that could be cut out of the lineup to add the HD channels that we're ALREADY paying for.I really don't see how you can say that these are channels "that we're ALREADY paying for". You signed up for a certain tier and there WAS a line-up when you signed up. I doubt that there were certain HD stations (other than INHD2) there at that time that are not there. I would suspect that, in most cases, TW has to pay for the extra HD channel - and they haven't raised their rates while saying the rates are for XXXX-HD, YYYY-HD, and so-on. Just because the basic line-up includes Starz, for example, doesn't mean that you are paying for Starz-HD currently.

CableGuy101 points out that lots of stuff needs to be done in local systems (besides signing licenses at corporate) to add these HD channels. And it has not been till this year that HD viewership has reached significant numbers (though we all could see it coming).

But your logic of "Already paying for" does escape me.

twelvepbrs

04-23-07, 01:41 PM

I really don't see how you can say that these are channels "that we're ALREADY paying for". You signed up for a certain tier and there WAS a line-up when you signed up. I doubt that there were certain HD stations (other than INHD2) there at that time that are not there. I would suspect that, in most cases, TW has to pay for the extra HD channel - and they haven't raised their rates while saying the rates are for XXXX-HD, YYYY-HD, and so-on. Just because the basic line-up includes Starz, for example, doesn't mean that you are paying for Starz-HD currently.
CableGuy101 points out that lots of stuff needs to be done in local systems (besides signing licenses at corporate) to add these HD channels. And it has not been till this year that HD viewership has reached significant numbers (though we all could see it coming).
But your logic of "Already paying for" does escape me.
"Already paying for" or NOT, there seems to be a lot of areas where TWC's rates are high relative to the quantity and quality of the service, so whether those customers are "already paying for" channels that they might not be receiving, it don't matter, the real issue is that TWC doesn't have very much value, especially for those interested in HD programming until they add several more HD channels without substantial rate increases, all sides of the biz are slimeballs, TWC touts "no boxes to buy" but they'll sure as hell rent you one for $5.00 or even $15.00 a month (if it's a DVR), it's just a bunch of nickel and dime bullsh*t...

JayPSU

04-23-07, 01:44 PM

I really don't see how you can say that these are channels "that we're ALREADY paying for". You signed up for a certain tier and there WAS a line-up when you signed up. I doubt that there were certain HD stations (other than INHD2) there at that time that are not there. I would suspect that, in most cases, TW has to pay for the extra HD channel - and they haven't raised their rates while saying the rates are for XXXX-HD, YYYY-HD, and so-on. Just because the basic line-up includes Starz, for example, doesn't mean that you are paying for Starz-HD currently.

CableGuy101 points out that lots of stuff needs to be done in local systems (besides signing licenses at corporate) to add these HD channels. And it has not been till this year that HD viewership has reached significant numbers (though we all could see it coming).

But your logic of "Already paying for" does escape me.

When you subscribe to premium channels like HBO or Cinemax, you're paying for all of the channels of that service, including the on-demand of that premium, and all of it's components (the HD version as well). If you have a contract for those components in your deal for that channel and you hold it back from your subs, you are essentially letting those subs pay for the service and not giving them all of the services. Understand?

davehancock

04-23-07, 02:08 PM

When you subscribe to premium channels like HBO or Cinemax, you're paying for all of the channels of that service, including the on-demand of that premium, and all of it's components (the HD version as well). If you have a contract for those components in your deal for that channel and you hold it back from your subs, you are essentially letting those subs pay for the service and not giving them all of the services. Understand?Not quite: yes there often is a "package" of channels, but I think that you will find that not all cable systems subscribe to (and pay for) ALL AVAILABLE channels in that package. You subscribed to the package and channels on that package that they have available and their pricing was based on THAT. Sure, TW has (on most systems) yet to charge extra for those extra HD channels that they do add - but that does not necessarily mean that they (TW) don't have to pay a premium to the supplier for the HD version of a SD channel in that line-up.

Besides the programming costs of additional HD channels, there is also the infrastructure (they like to call it "plant") costs: new satellite dishs, satellite receivers, QAM modulators, (or worse, many Edge QAM modulators), etc. that they should get some additional revenue.

You folks who say TW is "only interested in their bottom line" are really correct - EVERY company is! And many of us benefit from this bottom line through our retirement plans, etc. Successful companies do look at Customer Service as a means to obtain good bottom lines - IN THE LONG RUN. Bitch about TW all you want, but in my experience, they are better in the Customer Service (not necessarily HD channel line-up) than the others (Comcast, Cablevision, Adelphia)

twelvepbrs

04-23-07, 04:09 PM

...Bitch about TW all you want, but in my experience, they are better in the Customer Service (not necessarily HD channel line-up) than the others (Comcast, Cablevision, Adelphia)
comparing one local monopoly to another is pretty pointless, the comparison to D*, E*, FiosTV is more apt, also your experience with TW's customer service may be only limited to Fairport, NY (bit assumption here), in the past five years i've had cable service through Cox, Comcast, Charter AND TW in different parts of Florida, Maryland, and California, and they all suck, just because one pile of sh*t smells a little better than another doesn't mean anything, it's still a pile of sh*t!!!

holl_ands

04-23-07, 04:36 PM

Maybe an example will help (this is TWC-SD):

Unencrypted QAM tuners and DCR HDTV w/o CableCARD installed get Local-HD for NO EXTRA COST
after subscribing to Basic Cable.

After subscribing to (any) Digital Tier, there is no EXTRA COST for Local-HD, PADRES-HD, DISC-HD & TNT-HD.
HD-STB is same cost as SD-STB....and CableCARD cost is the same.
An additional DVR Service cost is the same for SD-DVR and HD-DVR.
So HD is NO EXTRA COST to digital subscribers.

After subscribing to each Premium Tier, there is NO EXTRA COST for HBO-HD, SHO-HD, CMAX-HD and/or STARZ-HD.
There is also a mandated Premium Tier "Buy-Through" access for subscribers who do not want any Digital Tier.

Of course, HD-VIP Pak (HDNET/HDMOV, inHD, UNIV-HD, ESPN-HD) is an additional cost.

I'm sure the sports nutz will want ESPN2-HD (for only a few hours of HD per week????),
but if TWC has to work within a capacity constraint, personally I prefer having the additional
("free") CMAX-HD and STARZ-HD channels.....

==========================================
And let us not forget that PPV and HD-PPV (20 avail. now) programs are helping to cover the cost of these upgrades.
The "bundling" deals that require VOD Servers, etc for these functions, may be holding up HD channel
deployments in some systems....

Which is all wrapped up in the Next Gen VOD Servers and associated SDV, DSG upgrade in
new OCAP/MCARD STBs for instant FF/RW and improved VOD search function in the new Digital Navigator.

1 July....1 July....1 July....1 July....1 July....

gparris

04-23-07, 05:57 PM

holl_ands:
I would personally have got the CinemaxHD or at least the StarzHD (or both) added like you have vs. the mostly "pillar-barred" ESPN2HD we just got for TWC-Wisconsin, but no.
I pay $10 a month alone for StarzSD, so missing out on the HD part just stinks.
They don't offer it as part of a DigiPic package like many TWC locations do, either here...but I like some of the movies offered on it.
Bev and Co. here (managers at TWC) don't like StarzHD enough to price it right or offer it in HD it would seem...sucks to be in Wisconsin (for TWC subs). :mad:
Another FYI:
Our HD DVR service is a dollar MORE each month for the service part in addition to the STB monthly charge vs. the SD DVRs unlike the San Diego pricing.
So with 3 HDTVs that means three bucks more a month in addition to the $5 more/month with cable rate increases (makes it $8 more before tax/frac. fees) that I am paying for the same crappy HD lineup the past two years (no HD channel addition totals).

twelvepbrs

04-23-07, 06:05 PM

gparris

04-23-07, 06:13 PM

with 3 HDTV's is it safe to assume you live in a house? and if you live in a house, i'm surprised you dont' switch to D*, i would have switched in the past, but i don't have a good LOS to a D* bird and live on the 1st floor of an apartment building
FYI:
We have one in the HT room, one in the Mstr Bdrm and one in the Rec/Gym areas of the house.
I am a HT consultant in my family's business and use these setups additionally to move product/get business, too (it pays off, too).
As far as D* goes, our area does not offer all the HD locals like next-door (almost literally) Chicago does (5 HD locals).
Going OTA to get the remaining HD locals (we get only 3 HD locals from D*) requires a massive mast antenna that I will not put (butt ugly) up due to the hills and many trees/houses around the home to get those 5 HD locals I would get with D* if that was possible.
Anyway, D* does not offer PBSHD or INHD/MOJO which we would miss.
Now, give us the Chicago HD locals and add those 100 HD channels they keep advertising about, maybe then, but not now.
Even U-Verse is not available in my area yet, so that is not an option.

twelvepbrs

04-23-07, 06:56 PM

FYI:
We have one in the HT room, one in the Mstr Bdrm and one in the Rec/Gym areas of the house.
I am a HT consultant in my family's business and use these setups additionally to move product/get business, too (it pays off, too).
As far as D* goes, our area does not offer all the HD locals like next-door (almost literally) Chicago does (5 HD locals).
Going OTA to get the remaining HD locals (we get only 3 HD locals from D*) requires a massive mast antenna that I will not put (butt ugly) up due to the hills and many trees/houses around the home to get those 5 HD locals I would get with D* if that was possible.
Anyway, D* does not offer PBSHD or INHD/MOJO which we would miss.
Now, give us the Chicago HD locals and add those 100 HD channels they keep advertising about, maybe then, but not now.
Even U-Verse is not available in my area yet, so that is not an option.
oh, sorry i made the assumption that OTA reception was good in your area, just goes to show that everyone situation is unique, i'm swimming in OTA signal but have a lot of multipath problems, but with a good (even indoor) antenna i could probably get all the locals/PBS in HD no problem...INHD/MOJO is in the crapper for me until they start carrying MLB games again

cableguy101

04-24-07, 01:34 AM

Yea it does vary from system to system on how the channel lineups are and pricing etc. The guy from La Quinta is right... Desert Cities which is the system i work on is covering almost all the Coachella valley which is from Cherry Valley/Baumont/banning to Coachella and Thermal!! A very big system, one of the biggest in TWC for size that is!! As for DC system, DC= Desert Cities, We have no more bandwith right now, we are a 750 MEGA system and actually have channels out to 759 or I think they are trying 765 Meg, So we are already over the system limits, I just heard the other day a rumor, not sure if its true, but DC is supposed to be getting a 1 gig update for our plant which would help so much for adding channels and getting things ready. Problem is, it is jsut a rumor for now and its gonna take a long time to get everything updated. We are looking for a quality drop-in module for all our amps so it can go to 1 gig, our taps are already rated for 1 gig. And the new Adephia system we jsut acquired in DHS is a 860 Meg system, and they are doing fine for bandwith, but theres a lot of problems up there due to adelphias' way of running things. For instance, high light levels on the fiber optics, too high fo signal, lots of ingress on the plant (ingress is noise). Problem is coporate, they take their sweet time making deals and then realease them whenever they feel like it. I am un-happy with TWC out here even as an employee because I know they can do better and etc but they dont yet, what they are doing is waiting until FiOS is almost ready to be launched until they decide to up their speeds for RR internet and make pricing cheaper. We already have a cheaper Triple play package that i think is great, but most people dont know about it, just need to call in and ask if theres a new package to get for channels and it should be cheaper!! but yea, i think i went off subject there but just a lil insight on whats going on in my sytem!!

twelvepbrs

04-24-07, 01:47 AM

...We already have a cheaper Triple play package that i think is great, but most people dont know about it, just need to call in and ask if theres a new package to get for channels and it should be cheaper!!
tried that, they told me to go pound sand

Berk32

04-24-07, 02:14 AM

OK... It's Official.

http://nyrangers.com/tickets/schedule.asp
Game 1 7PM Wednesday at Buffalo VersusHD Exclusive
Game 2 7PM Friday at Buffalo MSG/VersusHD
Game 3 2PM Sunday at NYR NBCHD
Game 4 7PM Tuesday at NYR VersusHD Exclusive
*Game 5 7PM Friday at Buffalo MSG/VersusHD
*Game 6 2PM Sunday at NYR NBCHD
*Game 7 7PM Tuesday at Buffalo MSG/VersusHD

So basically.... the worst possible outcome....
2 games in HD out of a possible 7 for us with TWC in NY...

Thanks to everyone who makes these decisions....
TWC... MSG... Versus... NBC... the NHL....

HDTV Dude

04-24-07, 09:38 AM

comparing one local monopoly to another is pretty pointless, the comparison to D*, E*, FiosTV is more apt, also your experience with TW's customer service may be only limited to Fairport, NY (bit assumption here), in the past five years i've had cable service through Cox, Comcast, Charter AND TW in different parts of Florida, Maryland, and California, and they all suck, just because one pile of sh*t smells a little better than another doesn't mean anything, it's still a pile of sh*t!!!

Agreed... Everyone knows that every company is interested in their bottom line but monopolies like TWC and all the other cable companies are ONLY interested in the bottom line. And believe me there's a big difference between the two.

gparris

04-24-07, 10:46 AM

Seems as though TWC needs some local competition to get it to add more HD channels and maybe watch its pricing (in theory at least).
Although AT&T's U-Verse is starting to lose its better customers-HD subscribers- to "U-Verse" in SE Wisconsin, that doesn't mean, at least so far, we will get more than ESPN2HD (recently) for HD channel additions.
This channel just replaced INHD2 from January's loss, that's all, nothing more.
San Antonio's TWC system with AT&T corporate in its backyard, so to speak, is an example of what happens when competiton does work in the consumer's favour (many more HD channels available).
TWC-Milwaukee just doesn't "get it" yet, I guess (or needs a bigger drop in HD subscribers).
Honestly, twelvepbrs, if there were any good alternatives to TWC HD service, I would have had switched already, but not yet (and TWC likes it that way).
When AT&T U-Verse does call me (or Verizon FIOS) I'll be ready, however. :D

AustinSTI

04-24-07, 10:47 AM

I'd like the same information for Center Ice in HD and VS HD for the Austin TWC. HD hockey spoils you for sd versions, especially when they keep saying during the SD broadcast that the game is available in HD.

Nice to see they will be adding ESPN2 HD and ESPN news HD in 2008 though...buh (really? ESPN news?)

Who do I talk to in order to get FIOS in Austin..)

Nobody cause ATT won't let verizon in. Believe me I'm with you on that. TWC said they should be adding ESPN2 within the month in Austin but nothing else coming due to 'technical' constraints...

gparris

04-24-07, 01:23 PM

Actually, I've been thinking that since I live in an area served by Verizon (formerly GTE), AT&T U-Verse may not ever be available, the opposite of your location, AustinSTI.

FIOS TV sounds better from what users have been reporting even in this forum and they just added 3 more HD channels, too.

Verizon keeps begging me to switch back from TWC's system for all three services, but I tell them that won't ever happen unless I can get FIOS TV, too. ;)

cableguy101

04-24-07, 01:36 PM

Riverside_Guy

04-24-07, 02:25 PM

But your logic of "Already paying for" does escape me.

Think about this... we pay certain rate for HBO that compromises multiple channels. We don't get all the channels that are part of the rate. The rate is NOT adjusted because we are NOT getting all the content that the rate pays for. So we PAY for the HD channel, but don't get it (obviously, in my market at this point it's not longer true, but we didn't get Starz & Cinemax HD until last fall, so there was almost 2 years that we paid for them but didn't get their HD channel).

How about gas? Let's say you pay 3 bucks/gallon. Within 50 miles of you, you only get 3/4 gallon for the same gallon rate. 50 miles away, for the same 3 bucks, you get a full gallon.

gparris

04-24-07, 02:30 PM

Thanks for the input, cableguy101, but TWC has dozens of god-awful analogue SD channels that are NOT digital that should be and are...on FIOS.
True, I have seen FIOS in the Tampa area when I worked there and found the pictures (the HD ones) equivalent to TWC, but more HD channels were offered, including ALL the digital local ones...not so, with many TWC locations, even with that SBG agreement signed months ago (like my location).
IF cost is a factor, I would gladly pay a bit more for more HD channels, perhaps like what U-Verse does with its $10 "technology fee" or D* or E* ask for to get HD channels, if the quanity of HD channels significantly increases.
As for service, I did not receive any negative reviews from locals about FIOS there in terms of time downs, slow delivery of repairs (after bad storms) and so on.
It would vary, you would think, like everything-it depends on the FIOS (or TWC) location...I am sure your area gets good service (from you or your teams). ;)

Riverside_Guy

04-24-07, 02:41 PM

cableguy, I've taken some issue with some things you posted, but I think you're 100% on the money regarding FIOS. Plus you can add in issues in urban areas... nobody knows for sure and nobody is saying anything, but I seriously doubt it will be fiber into one's apartment. I suspect it's fiber into the building and cooper to each unit. TWC is almost the same, they are fiber to a manhole 50 feet away from my building.

STILL, from a HD perspective, TWC here sucks big time. We only get 13 regular HD channels, there are 8 others available at considerable extra cost (well, 5% of the population gets an additional 3 HD channels even though all of us pay the same rate). And I could guarentee you that when FIOS comes before our license/franchise agency, TWC will fight them getting a agreement tooth and nail.

davehancock

04-24-07, 03:02 PM

Watch out for FiOS BS. They is no difference in picture quality and sound than TWC digital lineup. Digital is digital!!I pretty much agree with the rest of what you say in this last post - but I must take issue with your statement that "Digital is digital!!" A raw, uncompressed HD video bitstream uses something around 1Gbps. OTA Broadcast HD is not much more than 18Mbps. To cram the 1Gbps data stream into 18Mbps (or less) compression is used, and the amount of compression used is variable. For example: that 1Gbps bit stream can be reduced to 18Mbps, 12Mbps, even 9Mbps. It all depends on how much compression is used. Yet IT IS ALL DIGITAL!

In an earlier post, you referred to 3HD channels per QAM (you later acknowledged that it was a typo). But there are cable systems that do cram 3HD channels per QAM (meaning each channel is 12Mbps). DirecTV uses, "HDLite" (a combination resolution limiting and added compression) of to cram more channels into a given space. It's PQ is certainly NOT as good as the PQ of a full 18Mbps digital channel (from OTA, cable or FiOS).

Now, people ASSUME that, because FiOS has more bandwidth, that it's PQ is better than cable. While, in theory this is true, it is not necessary true in practice. From what I have seen, FiOS has been using modified cable equipment (Motorola DVRs for example) that have the same bit rate limitations as their cable equivalents. This suggests that FiOS PQ is roughly the same as cable. And you suggest that in your post. However, I've heard places where FiOS was worse and I also know that some cable systems put 3 HD channels in per QAM.

I guess the bottom line here is that:
1) Being digital is no guarantee of quality (more on this in the next post I make)
2) There is an awful lot of regionalism in this - in some cities cable HD may be better than FiOS HD, and in other cities FiOS HD may be better than cable HD.

davehancock

04-24-07, 03:10 PM

Thanks for the input, cableguy101, but TWC has dozens of god-awful analogue SD channels that are NOT digital that should be and are...on FIOS.gparris, by this do you mean that digital SD channels are superior to analog SD channels in terms of Picture Quality? I take exception to such a generalization (though in the HD world, who cares about SD PQ?). Anytime one takes an analog signal (of any type), digitizes it and then compresses it (to get it to fit in a smaller space) the PQ is going to suffer. Granted, the digital signal is more immune to noise and interference, but it is also lower in resolution, tone scale accuracy, and absence of compression artifacts.

davehancock

04-24-07, 03:19 PM

Think about this... we pay certain rate for HBO that compromises multiple channels. We don't get all the channels that are part of the rate. The rate is NOT adjusted because we are NOT getting all the content that the rate pays for. So we PAY for the HD channel, but don't get it (obviously, in my market at this point it's not longer true, but we didn't get Starz & Cinemax HD until last fall, so there was almost 2 years that we paid for them but didn't get their HD channel).Well: do YOU know what cable is paying for those channels? Unless you know what TW has to pay for each of the channels in a "package" and whether or not TW has to pay more to carry the HD equivalent of a channel - you really don't know if you are paying for something you do not get.
How about gas? Let's say you pay 3 bucks/gallon. Within 50 miles of you, you only get 3/4 gallon for the same gallon rate. 50 miles away, for the same 3 bucks, you get a full gallon.But isn't that the case? In NYC vs NJ: 1) the taxes are higher (per gallon); and 2) the costs of the property (land) for the gas station are higher, so the cost per gallon of gas is higher in NYC than in NJ. Does that mean that the gas station operator in NYC is making more money per gallon than the operator in NJ? I doubt it. So the point is????

gparris

04-24-07, 03:30 PM

davehancock: I meant our analogue channels, not the digital channels that are SD.
Cable analogues are bandwidth-eating, missing pixels, bad interference monsters - better watched on much smaller TV screens where you may not notice this as much.
I have compared some of my favourite analogue channels from TWC on the FIOS system, though not side by side, mind you, but the same channels were much more watchable on FIOS than on TWC.
The SD channels on the FIOS system that I watched on were considerably clearer and artifact-free, these didn't me beg for the the HD version as much as it would had I been stuck with the TWC analogue version, it just would have been appreciated.
(Example: Battlestar Galactica on Universal HD vs. Sci-Fi channel's version in SD vs. analogue TWC).
When TWC decides to get rid of all the analogue channels, or copy them to digital for those with digital cable boxes, the sooner the better, IMO.

davehancock

04-24-07, 05:11 PM

davehancock: I meant our analogue channels, not the digital channels that are SD.
Cable analogues are bandwidth-eating, missing pixels, bad interference monsters - better watched on much smaller TV screens where you may not notice this as much.That's what I thought you meant - and I was explaining that, for SD, analog SD will be superior to digital SD - providing clean signals of each are delivered.

You refer to "missing pixels" - that would be a characteristic ONLY of a digital signal (analog has only lines - no pixels).

In many (if not most, by now) cable systems the SD channels are "simulcast", sent both in analog and digital form. Approximately 12 SD digital channels go in one QAM channel (the space of an analog SD channel). On these systems, when you tune to a simulcast channel on a cable STB, the digital version will be selected. However if you connect the cable direct to the TV (using the NTSC tuner) you will get the analog version of the same channel. Frankly, the larger the screen, and the higher the quality of the display, the more you will notice the inferiority of the digital version. Again, assuming a clean analog signal - which is not always the case.

John Mason

04-25-07, 10:43 AM

Frankly, the larger the screen, and the higher the quality of the display, the more you will notice the inferiority of the digital version. Again, assuming a clean analog signal - which is not always the case.
Not the case here with TWC's NYC digital SD channels. Some time back I often made A-B comparisons between analog and digital versions of the same SD channel; one remote-control button made the instant switch. That's only 8' from a 64" 9"-gun RPTV. Digitals were better.

Also, TWC's delivery of 8--10 SD channels per 256-QAM, 6-MHz-wide cable slot (with rate shaping and statistical multiplexing) likely is inferior to their satellite-downlinked SD program sources from C-band etc. But then if TWC or other MSOs wanted to devote the bandwidth they could assign higher bit rates to SD sources and match the C-band picture quality. There are frequent reports Verizon's FIOS (fiber) SD has better PQ than standard sources; an interesting comparison would be between FIOS SD (and HD) and the satellite downlinks. -- John

Riverside_Guy

04-25-07, 12:41 PM

DirecTV uses, "HDLite" (a combination resolution limiting and added compression) of to cram more channels into a given space. It's PQ is certainly as good as the PQ of a full 18Mbps digital channel (from OTA, cable or FiOS).

"HDLite" as good as a 18mb/s channel?

Riverside_Guy

04-25-07, 01:33 PM

Well: do YOU know what cable is paying for those channels? Unless you know what TW has to pay for each of the channels in a "package" and whether or not TW has to pay more to carry the HD equivalent of a channel - you really don't know if you are paying for something you do not get.

My contention is based on what WE pay... we do NOT pay an extra premium for a premium's HD channel (and I have never heard anyone on any system that pays additional for a premium's HD channel). If that premium did charge extra for their HD channel to my MSO, in no way would I ever believe we would not be passed on this extra cost. You have any evidence that TWC pays MORE to HBO or whomever for delivering it's HD channel? You really think that last November when we got Starz HD and Cinemax HD that TWC started paying more money and decided to absorb those costs out of the goodness of their hearts?

VisionOn

04-25-07, 06:25 PM

IF cost is a factor, I would gladly pay a bit more for more HD channels, perhaps like what U-Verse does with its $10 "technology fee" or D* or E* ask for to get HD channels, if the quanity of HD channels significantly increases.

If Verizon turned up at my door tomorrow and said we can give you the full Verizon FiOS HD channel lineup you want but it will cost twice what you are paying now. I wouldn't even blink before saying yes. Especially if they throw in their standard broadband speed as well.

I don't care if it's more expensive. When TWC Raleigh starts to actually show some progress outside of Navigator (and I use "progress" loosely there) and RefrigeratorsOnDemand they'll get my attention. But right now they've been spinning their wheels too long and using my money to do it.

holl_ands

04-25-07, 07:13 PM

Watch out for FiOS BS. They is no difference in picture quality and sound than TWC digital lineup. Digital is digital!! At least from what I have seen with FiOS launched over in Baumont. Also the prices that FiOS is giving customers are just goint to be teaser prices to lure you in, you watch. Prices may be nice and cheap now but once they get more subscribers and figure out how to actually run a TV company, they are gonna realize that they are losing money and are going to need to increase prices to make up for the money they invested in putting Fiber everywhere and to make up what they have lost with the teaser prices. Someone is going to have to pay for the Fiber that was put in, and who you think is gonna get the bill? The customer!! Not only that, how long does it take for Verizon or any Telephone compnay to respond to a trouible call you put in? 2 weeks? maybe longer, and how much do they charge you? Look at TWC, Trouble calls for the most part out here I know are gotten to within a couple days, not weeks like the telco companies! and not only that we dont charge for the Trouble call unless under certain circumstances! Lets see the telco companies beat that service. They are just beginning in TV service, TWC has been doing it for decades!!
It's hard to draw generalities, cuz each SD channel seems to have a different "PQ".

The REALLY BAD SD channels probably originate and are transferred to C-Band
SAT uplink terminals via antique analog equipment....
and then put on the worst of the worst analog C-Band transponders.
[Like perhaps ComedyCentral, E!, LMN, MTV, Spike, TRVL, VH1, WE....]

Additional degradation can then occur in the analog portion of the cable plant....
plus digitization degradation, since HFC cable systems distribute to local node
in digital form, where QAM and Analog Edge Modulators at your local node
convert them to QAM-256 and reconstituted analog simulcast channels:
http://www.rgbnetworks.com/products/images/sep48_diagram.jpg

Since it's GIGO, can you really see the extra degradation in the reconstituted
signal coming out of the Analog Edge Modulator (which must undergo additional
degradation throughout your local neighborhood cable network)...compared to the
reconstituted signal coming directly out of your STB??? Depends on the neighborhood....

==============================
The BEST SD channels probably originate as MPEG2 and STAY DIGITAL until
converted back to Analog by either the Edge Modulator or (preferably) your STB.

Plus degradation due to bitrate starvation whenever a STATMUX is employed...

This is a golden opportunity to take a good thing (all digital transfer)
and really muck it up by packing too many SD channels on the C-Band uplink
and then recompressing a DIFFERENT assortment of too many SD channels
into each QAM256 cable channel.....

And then there are probably channels that are a mixture of Analog and MPEG2.....

=============================
Most of the digital source material feeding today's systems is MPEG2.
Obviously, there will be degradation due to transcoding from MPEG2 to MPEG4,
when conveyed via Uverse and FiOS...and HD for D*, E*.

The transcoding degradation will be higher for already bit-starved LIL-HD channels.
And the degradation should be much less if the source is a pre-encoded, full datarate,
MPEG2 file sitting on the programming service's server....

Redigitizing movies, et.al. is going to take some time, but "soon" Turner
Networks will originate linear programing in both MPEG2 and MPEG4:
http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2006/prod_110906.html

Hopefully, other programing sources will follow the same game plan,
eliminating the MPEG2/MPEG4 transcoding operation:
http://www.telecommagazine.com/Americas/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_2105
http://www.ses-americom.com/americom/siteSections/pressroom/04_16_07.php

So starting next year, some MPEG4 channels should begin to benefit from
the (alleged) video coding improvements, such as fewer macroblocking events
and even keeping two sets of parameters to follow flashing strobe lights.