I'm confused, are you saying cable should be allowed to degrade HD locals or that SatCos should not? :)

Now I'm confused... you're just kidding me right :confused: ???
Neither one should be allowed to do it but if you allow one you should allow the same thing for the other. I'm just tired of the FCC boning cable and bending over backwards for the SatCo's. What's good for the goose is good for the gander
If you read the entire article, the FCC has already voted on letting the SatCo's down-rez their HD and the vote was unanimous ..... I see HD-Lite making a come back .... :p;)

Laters,
Mikef5

seems like I remember Comcast making fun of Directv for having an inferior HD Signal a while back...hmmm...

Now I'm confused... you're just kidding me right :confused: ???
Neither one should be allowed to do it but if you allow one you should allow the same thing for the other. I'm just tired of the FCC boning cable and bending over backwards for the SatCo's. What's good for the goose is good for the gander
If you read the entire article, the FCC has already voted on letting the SatCo's down-rez their HD and the vote was unanimous ..... I see HD-Lite making a come back .... :p;)

Laters,
Mikef5
Actually, it's more a case of the playing field being evened out, cable has been able to do pretty much whatever they wanted since 1996. Now that somebody in Washington is paying attention, cable is crying foul. Spare me...

Keep in mind, cable does not do HD in every market yet either.

First off, the DBS guys can now carry the SD versions of the HD locals in a bunch of obscure markets for a few more years until more satcom capacity is online. Basically, they are not going to have to carry some independent religious TV station in whackyourbutt,TX in HD and waste their satcom capacity to do so. Local users who care about these stations can use an OTA antenna and pick up that signal and experience in HD. The DBS guys already carry all the major locals in major markets in full HD. In this area it just means that KRON might not get carried in full HD... :-) But as I said, local OTA will work just fine.

However, DirecTV is not downrezzing A&E, NGC, etc..., all NATIONAL channels that have no local OTA option. If Comcast downrezzs it, I cannot just stick an antenna out and pick up A&E the way it's supposed to be.

This is an apples and oranges comparison.

It's not apples and oranges.. If one can do it then all should be able to do it. Separate rules for companies is bias in my opinion especially when it favors one over the other. Does the Satco's carry those local channels in analog ?? No, but cable has to and has to long after the broadcasters stop broadcasting the analog signal. Why doesn't the Satco's have to do the same thing ??

Stick an antenna up, yeah that would go over real big but if they allow the Satco's to do that then cable should be allowed to do it also.

I don't understand the problem with, " When rules are made they apply to everyone not just the ones we like or want to help ".

To say they don't have the capacity to carry all HD in the areas is B.S., Directv just launched another satellite for added capacity and Dish is suppose to launch one soon also. I believe their commercials say they have the most HD channels, more than Comcast. So if they mismanage their bandwidth, so they don't have enough to do all the local HD or the local must carrys like cable is required to, that is their problem and it's the same problem that cable has to deal with.... Do you get a lot of channels at the expense of picture quality or do you try and maintain picture quality by staying within the limits of the available bandwidth. Directv went in the direction of getting a lot of channels and now cries because they don't have the bandwidth left do to the same thing that cable is required to do.

Make the rules apply to everyone and let the market decide on what product the customers want.

Laters,
Mikef5

BTW, The 5 FCC commissioners will be meeting at Stanford on April 17th holding a public meeting on Broadband Network Management Practices aka Comcast's traffic shaping policies.

Folks from this list who are interested in the topic should plan to attend and make their opinions heard.

You could even bring up how Comcast is degrading HD quality by packing 3 HD signals in 1 6 Mhz channel while you are at it - I think a number of the commissioners would be very interested in hearing about it, and all 5 will be there in person. :-)

We should probably get there on April 1st or thereabouts to make sure we actually get in, can't have Comcast filling up all the seats with their employees. :rolleyes:

Actually, it's more a case of the playing field being evened out, cable has been able to do pretty much whatever they wanted since 1996. Now that somebody in Washington is paying attention, cable is crying foul. Spare me...

Never said cable was spotless and that they haven't done things in the past that sucked but the recent rulings by the FCC doesn't make it right now to favor one over the other. The FCC, along time ago should have done something to reel them in but to totally favor one part of the industry over another is wrong now as it was in the past to favor cable.

Laters,
Mikef5

seems like I remember Comcast making fun of Directv for having an inferior HD Signal a while back...hmmm...

Hasn't even been a year, oh well, they can scrap all that advertisement now.

As I've said before, I'd love to see SciFi-HD on Comcast to compare it to DirecTV as the DirecTV feed looks absolutely spectacular, I've never seen any of the issues that have been reported about that 3-per channel in some other threads.

Hasn't even been a year, oh well, they can scrap all that advertisement now.

As I've said before, I'd love to see SciFi-HD on Comcast to compare it to DirecTV as the DirecTV feed looks absolutely spectacular, I've never seen any of the issues that have been reported about that 3-per channel in some other threads.

Speaking of SciFi...anyone have a good guess when we will get it?

Here's a scan of the card. I had to crop it but the pertinent info is there.

This post shows a program card for SciFi HD but it doesnt give in any date? IS there anymore info on this?

Just went home for lunch and I'm upgraded! Woo hoo! Finally Comcast delivers just in time. I'm in the Bernardo El Camino area. Time for a nice HD filled weekend.



wow...cant wait to get home from work.......

This post shows a program card for SciFi HD but it doesnt give in any date? IS there anymore info on this?

Mr. J, you out there? We NEED our sci-fi HD on April 4.:D

Mr. J, you out there? We NEED our sci-fi HD on April 4.:D

I concur...

3 HD channels on 1 6mhz channel isn't the end of the world, either.

If one or two of them are 720p channels, and they use good rate-shaping, we shouldn't see much if any degradation the vast majority of the time. 6mhz is 38Mpbs and while technically one channel can use half that (19Mbps) I doubt the average rate is nearly that high on most channels. Most of the stuff I record (MPEG2-TS via Firewire) averages around 10Mbps. 38Mpbs divided by 3 is 12.66Mbps - and if they use rate-shaping that allows one channel to briefly use more than that during peaks - assuming two or all three of the channels don't need peak output at the same time... things shouldn't turn to mush.

I guess we'll see. I think Comcast knows which side of the HD toast their bread is buttered. I'd switch to satellite pretty quick if I thought the PQ was better AND they had more channels AND it was cheaper...

Never said cable was spotless and that they haven't done things in the past that sucked but the recent rulings by the FCC doesn't make it right now to favor one over the other. The FCC, along time ago should have done something to reel them in but to totally favor one part of the industry over another is wrong now as it was in the past to favor cable.

Laters,
Mikef5Cable's track record of consumer support, from pricing to programming, has inarguably been far worse than DBS, historically. It's that simple.

Of course, I'm still a Comcast customer. But, if DirecTV had TVJapan, I'd be gone in a nanosecond. More HD. Better hardware. And MUCH lower prices.

But, this isn't a Comcast vs. DBS thread.

I'd switch to satellite pretty quick if I thought the PQ was better AND they had more channels AND it was cheaper...Ummmm. It is, they do, and it is.

3 HD channels on 1 6mhz channel isn't the end of the world, either.

If one or two of them are 720p channels, and they use good rate-shaping, we shouldn't see much if any degradation the vast majority of the time. 6mhz is 38Mpbs and while technically one channel can use half that (19Mbps) I doubt the average rate is nearly that high on most channels. Most of the stuff I record (MPEG2-TS via Firewire) averages around 10Mbps. 38Mpbs divided by 3 is 12.66Mbps - and if they use rate-shaping that allows one channel to briefly use more than that during peaks - assuming two or all three of the channels don't need peak output at the same time... things shouldn't turn to mush.

I guess we'll see. I think Comcast knows which side of the HD toast their bread is buttered. I'd switch to satellite pretty quick if I thought the PQ was better AND they had more channels AND it was cheaper...

No, it's not the end of the world. But, keep in mind that SciFi-HD, USA-HD and Discovery-HD are all 1080i channels, and they're all MPEG2. Something is going to give the way Comcast is distributing them and it's going to be PQ.

Wait until you get some tennis on USA-HD, some wrestling on SciFi and some action animal sequences on Disc-HD, all at the same time, it ain't going to be pretty.

Oh yeah, the current PQ from DirecTV is every bit as good as Comcast, apparently better on some channels, although I can't verify that as I still don't have any more HD from Comcast here than I did 4+ years ago.

Comcast has just done too little, too late, now they're trying to play catch-up and they're cutting corners.

Never said cable was spotless and that they haven't done things in the past that sucked but the recent rulings by the FCC doesn't make it right now to favor one over the other. The FCC, along time ago should have done something to reel them in but to totally favor one part of the industry over another is wrong now as it was in the past to favor cable.

Laters,
Mikef5

As Keenan pointed out, Cable doesn't carry all the locals in HD either. They would burn a ton of network capacity (that they don't have) in doing so, and it would make no sense.

Cutting corners on HD quality is not good. Esp if you are bunching together a bunch of 1080i signals, and not using very good gear to do the transrating, as it appears Comcast is doing.

I talked with a friend of mine who does a lot of work with the FCC, and this issue isn't on their radar at all yet, so I think it would be great to bring it up at Stanford next month. It really could have quite an impact.

No, it's not the end of the world. But, keep in mind that SciFi-HD, USA-HD and Discovery-HD are all 1080i channels, and they're all MPEG2. Something is going to give the way Comcast is distributing them and it's going to be PQ.

Wait until you get some tennis on USA-HD, some wrestling on SciFi and some action animal sequences on Disc-HD, all at the same time, it ain't going to be pretty.

Oh yeah, the current PQ from DirecTV is every bit as good as Comcast, apparently better on some channels, although I can't verify that as I still don't have any more HD from Comcast here than I did 4+ years ago.

Comcast has just done too little, too late, now they're trying to play catch-up and they're cutting corners.

Rather than playing all these silly games they should just move a block of 10 analog channels to digital and just be done with it. This isn't that hard a problem to solve, but they keep trying to do things around the edges rather than get to the core of the problem.

Rather than playing all these silly games they should just move a block of 10 analog channels to digital and just be done with it. This isn't that hard a problem to solve, but they keep trying to do things around the edges rather than get to the core of the problem.

Now on that point I agree with you 1000 per cent. Drop the bandwidth wasting analog channels and be done with it but the FCC is requiring that cable carry those analog channels and if I remember right for at least 3 years after the analog shut off date. If the Satco's had to carry those same channels you'd hear a scream all the way to the FCC's front door.

Another problem with moving analog channels to the digital tier is the contracts that cable has with the program providers. They still think analog gives them the most band for their buck. Until those contracts can be renegotiated and allowed to be moved to the digital tier we're stuck with them or when they realize there is no analog anymore after Feb of next year.

All I'm trying to say is the rules should apply to all providers the same. What a provider did in the past is in the past and you can't do anything about what happened in the past but you can on what will happen in the future.

You want more HD channels, then get rid of analog, that's the easiest and most cost effective way of getting more bandwidth without a big investment in equipment or outlay of cash. Plus it would put off until later the use of other bandwidth saving strategies like 3 channels muxed into one with rate shaping or the use of SDV or mpeg4 compression. If you don't you will see these strategies put to use, you're already seeing rate shaping and SDV being tested in some areas ( Time Warner is using SDV big time in their system ) and it's only a matter of time before it gets here and used if it isn't already.

Laters,
Mikef5

Now on that point I agree with you 1000 per cent. Drop the bandwidth wasting analog channels and be done with it but the FCC is requiring that cable carry those analog channels and if I remember right for at least 3 years after the analog shut off date.I doubt very much if the FCC is requiring they carry Animal Planet and Comedy Central on the analog spectrum. I'm pretty sure the only thing they are required to carry that way are OTA locals, public access, and community channels.

If they moved all national channels to digital, it would free up enough bandwidth to add as many HD nationals as DirecTV, Dish's Voom channels, HDNet and Movies, and still have room left over.

I should kick myself for using Wikipedia as a source but I'm too lazy to search for a better one. According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast), Comcast has a total of 24.2 million cable customers, 14.7 of which are digital cable customers. That leaves almost 10 million customers who watch analog channels only. So I don't think it's that easy to just move those channels to the digital spectrum without ticking a whole bunch of people off.

I doubt very much if the FCC is requiring they carry Animal Planet and Comedy Central on the analog spectrum. I'm pretty sure the only thing they are required to carry that way are OTA locals, public access, and community channels.

If they moved all national channels to digital, it would free up enough bandwidth to add as many HD nationals as DirecTV, Dish's Voom channels, HDNet and Movies, and still have room left over.
You still have the problem with existing contracts and yes the program providers still think analog is where they should invest their advertising dollars. Cable can't move them to digital until those contracts either expire or are renegotiated.

I'd love to drop them all and go strictly digital. If they need a box for the core channels give it to them. The government is giving rebates so you could get a cheap QAM tuner/converter and you'll get the core channels and cable could go all digital now. The writing is on the wall, analog is going away but IMHO not fast enough.

As far as how much bandwidth will be gained, I think you're being a little optimistic about how much could be gained, like I'm being overly pessimistic on the affect analog has on cable but I think we both agree analog has to go away for cable to be able to compete with the Satcos, I just think it should go now and not later and go away completely and I don't want cable to have to use some compression scheme or rate shaping to get more bandwidth and screw up picture quality.

Laters,
Mikef5

I should kick myself for using Wikipedia as a source but I'm too lazy to search for a better one. According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast), Comcast has a total of 24.2 million cable customers, 14.7 of which are digital cable customers. That leaves almost 10 million customers who watch analog channels only. So I don't think it's that easy to just move those channels to the digital spectrum without ticking a whole bunch of people off.

I remember when it was just the other way around, more analog than digital. Then it made sense to keep analog because the advertisers put their money in the biggest market but now with more digital customers than analog and analog going away next year....

So what should we do ?? Wait until there is no analog signals being broadcasted but make cable keep them on their system because people don't want to change ?? But bitch at cable for not having more HD channels or screwing up picture quality because some people want analog for what ever reason they have ?? Eventually they will have no other choice but to switch everyone to digital if not you will see SDV used by other providers other than Time Warner, they'll have no other choice.

Laters,
Mikef5

Hello to all, My name is curtis and Im from San Ramon. I've been an avid reader of this forum for the past few months but i just recieved some valuable information regarding the new hd channel additions in our area so I decided to register and post something for the first time. My best friend works for Comcast as a repair CSR and he mentioned that all the folks there recieved a communication today with the list of the channels and the launch date so here's a quick rundown:

Sci-Fi HD - Channel 736
FOOD Network HD - Channel 747
Animal Planet HD - Channel 751
TLC HD - Channel 752
CNN HD - Channel 759

Launch date :april 15th

This will be available to all customers in rebuild areas ( 750 systems) who at least have the digital starter package. We're supposed to have mgs sent to our cable box's over the next few weeks to make people aware of the change. Hope this info is helpfull to all who were curious.

Curtis

I bet they'll be 3-packed like the below.

Discovery Channel - 1080i
SciFi - 1080i (new)
USA - 1080i

Food - 1080i (new)
NatGeo - 720p
UHD - 1080i

A&E - 1080i
HGTV - 1080i
Starz - 1080i

Cinemax - 1080i
HBO - 1080i
TLC - 1080i (new)

Animal Planet - 1080i (new)
Discovery HD Theater - 1080
History HD - 720p

CNN-HD(1080i) hasn't been mentioned as being a 3-pak channel AFAIK, be funny if it was a news channel that was left unmolested.

Hello to all, My name is curtis and Im from San Ramon. I've been an avid reader of this forum for the past few months but i just recieved some valuable information regarding the new hd channel additions in our area so I decided to register and post something for the first time. My best friend works for Comcast as a repair CSR and he mentioned that all the folks there recieved a communication today with the list of the channels and the launch date so here's a quick rundown:

Sci-Fi HD - Channel 736
FOOD Network HD - Channel 747
Animal Planet HD - Channel 751
TLC HD - Channel 752
CNN HD - Channel 759

Launch date :april 15th

This will be available to all customers in rebuild areas ( 750 systems) who at least have the digital starter package. We're supposed to have mgs sent to our cable box's over the next few weeks to make people aware of the change. Hope this info is helpfull to all who were curious.

Curtis

I guess my prediction was well on the dot :-D:

Based on what our friends over in Sacramento are receiving on March 31, I will guess we will get the following in our area:

Food Network HD
Sci-Fi HD
Animal Planet HD
TLC HD
CNN HD

They are also scheduled to get AMC HD....maybe we'll see it too :)

The government is giving rebates so you could get a cheap QAM tuner/converter and you'll get the core channels and cable could go all digital now.
The government specifically is *not* giving rebates for QAM tuners. QAM tuners are not on the list that qualify for the rebate.

Only ATSC/8VSB tuners.

Now on that point I agree with you 1000 per cent. Drop the bandwidth wasting analog channels and be done with it but the FCC is requiring that cable carry those analog channels and if I remember right for at least 3 years after the analog shut off date. If the Satco's had to carry those same channels you'd hear a scream all the way to the FCC's front door.
The analog carry requirements go away if the cable company goes all digital (and obviously provides digital receiving equipment to their subscribers)

I remember when it was just the other way around, more analog than digital. Then it made sense to keep analog because the advertisers put their money in the biggest market but now with more digital customers than analog and analog going away next year....

So what should we do ?? Wait until there is no analog signals being broadcasted but make cable keep them on their system because people don't want to change ?? But bitch at cable for not having more HD channels or screwing up picture quality because some people want analog for what ever reason they have ?? Eventually they will have no other choice but to switch everyone to digital if not you will see SDV used by other providers other than Time Warner, they'll have no other choice.

Laters,
Mikef5

I too remember when the numbers were the other the way around. However just because a customer is using digital doesn't mean they're using HD. The basis of this discussion is that Comcast should move analog channels to the digital spectrum to make room for HD channels. My guess is half of those 14.7 million customers are viewing on HD-capable sets (if someone has a number here, please do tell). So if my guess is right, there are 7.3 million customers who would benefit from moving channels from analog to digital, 10 million who would not want that to happen, and 7.3 million who could care less.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I'm one of the 7.3 million who would love to see the analog channels go away. But also as Mike pointed out, it's probably the contracts that are keeping channels in analog because the network advertisers don't want to lose 10 million potential targets.

I remember when it was just the other way around, more analog than digital. Then it made sense to keep analog because the advertisers put their money in the biggest market but now with more digital customers than analog and analog going away next year....
That's the whole point. There is some threshold where enough of the analog customers have migrated to digital that it makes sense to force the move. For other technology it is usually around 80-20 or 90-10. At that point, the cost of the older system outweight its benefits.

The government is giving rebates so you could get a cheap QAM tuner/converter and you'll get the core channels and cable could go all digital now. They are? Is this in addition to the coupons they've been issuing for ATSC converters?

Analog OTA is going away soon. EVERYBODY without a digital-capable TV will require an ATSC converter box, which the gov't is assisting with.

Yet, they are gving the cableco's an extra 3 years to convert. WTF? That's some BS right there. They should have to convert at the same time. They already have el cheapo basic QAM converters in the field. (They installed them in my mom's apt in FL, even though she doesn't subscribe to the digital tier channels, for like $2 per month.) The gov't should mandate that cable be required to switchover to all-digital by the same date as OTA. They could start installing those converters now.

I'm in Sunnyvale 94087, near Las Palmas Park, not yet upgraded. Right now all the channels are out, but internet is still working, at the same DL frequency (549 MHz). Hopefully that is a good sign.

Sci-Fi HD - Channel 736
FOOD Network HD - Channel 747
Animal Planet HD - Channel 751
TLC HD - Channel 752
CNN HD - Channel 759

Launch date :april 15th
Thanks Curtis! That pretty much rounds out the HD package for me.

The timing of the additions pretty much explains the recent 3-channel grouping and channel number reallocation, as well.

They are? Is this in addition to the coupons they've been issuing for ATSC converters?

Analog OTA is going away soon. EVERYBODY without a digital-capable TV will require an ATSC converter box, which the gov't is assisting with.

Yet, they are gving the cableco's an extra 3 years to convert. WTF? That's some BS right there. They should have to convert at the same time. They already have el cheapo basic QAM converters in the field. (They installed them in my mom's apt in FL, even though she doesn't subscribe to the digital tier channels, for like $2 per month.) The gov't should mandate that cable be required to switchover to all-digital by the same date as OTA. They could start installing those converters now.
Gary,

The cable industry wants to convert to all digital it's the FCC that requires them to continue to carry the analog channels past the broadcast cutoff date, unless a cable company can go all digital before 2009 then they don't have to carry those analog channels but with the latest discussion it seems people want their analog channels to be carried forever whether or not it affects the rest of the customer base or not. I'm with you, drop analog now, give them the boxes if they need it and move on to the digital age. I want more HD channels but not at the expense of picture quality and this would be the most cost effective way to do it.

Laters,
Mikef5

As far as how much bandwidth will be gained, I think you're being a little optimistic about how much could be gained...Really? You don't think that losing 40 or so analog channels would provide the kind of gains I referred to?

Yet, they are gving the cableco's an extra 3 years to convert. WTF? That's some BS right there. They should have to convert at the same time.

Unless something's changed, Cable Co's are NOT bound by the conversion and can continue to use analog for as long as they want. In fact, I believe Comcast has already stated it will continue to have at least some channels on analog well after OTA goes digital (maybe that's what you were thinking of).

Gary,

The cable industry wants to convert to all digital it's the FCC that requires them to continue to carry the analog channels past the broadcast cutoff date...You don't think the cableco's bitched and moaned to get that extra 3 years? If they wanted to convert now, they simply would. They could give every basic customer a basic QAM converter. And, they can add a digital tier equivalent to the expanded package, and have the expanded customers get standard digital converters.

BUT...they'd rather have the extra time to spread the cost across many more fiscal quarters, so that it looks good on the balance sheet.

Hello to all, My name is curtis and Im from San Ramon. I've been an avid reader of this forum for the past few months but i just recieved some valuable information regarding the new hd channel additions in our area so I decided to register and post something for the first time. My best friend works for Comcast as a repair CSR and he mentioned that all the folks there recieved a communication today with the list of the channels and the launch date so here's a quick rundown:

Sci-Fi HD - Channel 736
FOOD Network HD - Channel 747
Animal Planet HD - Channel 751
TLC HD - Channel 752
CNN HD - Channel 759

Launch date :april 15th

This will be available to all customers in rebuild areas ( 750 systems) who at least have the digital starter package. We're supposed to have mgs sent to our cable box's over the next few weeks to make people aware of the change. Hope this info is helpfull to all who were curious.

Curtis

Thanks Curtis for posting this. I just received an email from Mr. J. confirming your post as being accurate.

Finally, the SciFi-HD and the Food Network HD ( the old lady will like that one :))

Laters,
Mikef5

Too bad it's not in time for the season premiere.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v637/keenanj/SP32-20080321-103951.jpg

With all the action around Bernardo/ECR, I need to check when I get home tonight and see if I have the new channels (near Bernardo/Fremont).

Since I have never had all the "cool, extra" HD channels, a stupid question re: the addition of Sci-Fi HD. Does it carry the same show lineup as the "regular" Sci-Fi channel? In other words, will Sci-Fi HD have BSG at the same time as the regular channel, but in HD? Or is Sci-FI HD a separate schedule, and showing older BSG episodes, like UHD evidently does?

Too bad it's not in time for the season premiere.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v637/keenanj/SP32-20080321-103951.jpg

Darn, you're right.... maybe it will be on OnDemand so we can see it later. Of course some people can see it on Directv..... Jim ???

I don't like the April 15th date either, seems like something else happens that day but I don't want to TAX my mind over it. Hope it's not an omen :p

Laters,
Mikef5

With all the action around Bernardo/ECR, I need to check when I get home tonight and see if I have the new channels (near Bernardo/Fremont).

Since I have never had all the "cool, extra" HD channels, a stupid question re: the addition of Sci-Fi HD. Does it carry the same show lineup as the "regular" Sci-Fi channel? In other words, will Sci-Fi HD have BSG at the same time as the regular channel, but in HD? Or is Sci-FI HD a separate schedule, and showing older BSG episodes, like UHD evidently does?

SciFi-HD is a simulcast of the standard def channel.

Darn, you're right.... maybe it will be on OnDemand so we can see it later. Of course some people can see it on Directv..... Jim ???

I don't like the April 15th date either, seems like something else happens that day but I don't want to TAX my mind over it. Hope it's not an omen :p

Laters,
Mikef5

You'll miss the first 2 eps in fact. It looks like they're replaying the previous week ahead of the current episode so you might only miss one, you'll have to check the schedule.

http://www.scifi.com/schedulebot/index.php3?date=4-APR-2008&feed_req=

I, of course, will not miss a single one in HD. :D

You'll miss the first 2 eps in fact. It looks like they're replaying the previous week ahead of the current episode so you might only miss one, you'll have to check the schedule.

http://www.scifi.com/schedulebot/index.php3?date=4-APR-2008&feed_req=

I, of course, will not miss a single one in HD. :D

I've become addicted to this series. I was a fan of the old series and I had thought they'd screw this one up or I'd be constantly comparing the two but they've done a really good job with it and like I said, it's addicting. The Tivo's going to get a real work out just keeping up with what I watch now, good thing I now have the time to do that. :p

I vote we all go to Keenan's house for a BattleStar Galactica premier party !! :D

Laters,
Mikef5

satellite still scale down to 1400x1080 or so?

so far, we don't even have half those channels, not sure where that came from. until we see the results, well I'm not ready to abandon ship just yet...

... If they wanted to convert now, they simply would. They could give every basic customer a basic QAM converter. And, they can add a digital tier equivalent to the expanded package, and have the expanded customers get standard digital converters. ...

That change forces QAM people (like me) with expanded basic and no STB's to get a converter for every TV in the house, and would severely limit my current DVR. If Comcast had real support for CableCards, I would also vote for going all digital. As it is, I don't mind a little delay :rolleyes:

satellite still scale down to 1400x1080 or so?

so far, we don't even have half those channels, not sure where that came from. until we see the results, well I'm not ready to abandon ship just yet...

No. Certainly DirecTV is not doing that on their MPEG4 channels. This is consistent with people are seeing, but also what some friends of mine who work down in El Segundo have told me.

And with a good launch and orbital insertion of DirecTV 11, expect a TON more non-transrated HD to show up soon as well.

satellite still scale down to 1400x1080 or so?

so far, we don't even have half those channels, not sure where that came from. until we see the results, well I'm not ready to abandon ship just yet...
If they are, it sure doesn't show, SciFi has looked outstanding to me. Viewing Stargate Atlantis, I've never seen any motion blocking, and during scenes inside Atlantis, the detail is incredible. I've paused at scenes like in the well-lit botany lab and just stared at how good it looked.

Now, BSG is shot differently, much darker, and it may not have that crystal clear look of Stargate, but it will definitely look better than the SD channel.

Hopefully you'll have that quality from Comcast, but it doesn't appears that's in the cards.

You'll miss the first 2 eps in fact. It looks like they're replaying the previous week ahead of the current episode so you might only miss one, you'll have to check the schedule.

http://www.scifi.com/schedulebot/index.php3?date=4-APR-2008&feed_req=

I, of course, will not miss a single one in HD. :D

It looks like they're replaying the first one a week later (which is still before the 15th), but not any other ones. Maybe someone will accidentally turn it on a few days early...

No. Certainly DirecTV is not doing that on their MPEG4 channels. This is consistent with people are seeing, but also what some friends of mine who work down in El Segundo have told me.

And with a good launch and orbital insertion of DirecTV 11, expect a TON more non-transrated HD to show up soon as well.

(Did you get my PM?)

I'm in Sunnyvale 94087, near Las Palmas Park, not yet upgraded. Right now all the channels are out, but internet is still working, at the same DL frequency (549 MHz). Hopefully that is a good sign.
Sure would be nice if I got home from work today to find I've been upgraded. But I'm not expecting it. The flyer I received a week and a half ago said April 10th through May 13th. It's not even April yet, so I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if I'm upgraded before May 13th.

Is there anyone in a recently upgraded area that can comment on what time of the day they started receiving new channels? Or is Comcast typically "flipping the switch" in the middle of the night?

well if anyone read not only did i get my nat geo channel back we also get starz channels and the on demand stuff.... which is good the got some HD stuff

The cable industry wants to convert to all digital it's the FCC that requires them to continue to carry the analog channels past the broadcast cutoff date, unless a cable company can go all digital before 2009 then they don't have to carry those analog channels
...
but with the latest discussion it seems people want their analog channels to be carried forever whether or not it affects the rest of the customer base or not.
That makes no sense. Cable industry wants to convert to all digital. FCC says you have an advantage to go all digital by 2009 because in that case, you *don't* need to carry analog an additional 3-years. Yet in the same breath the FCC is preventing cable from going all digital. If anything, FCC is encouraging cable to go all digital by 2009.

If Cable wanted to go all digital, they would go all digital. FCC isn't preventing that at all. If they don't do it, it is because of their own reasons.

Nobody has ever argued (AFAICT) for analog to be carried forever. Could you point out where that has happened?

That makes no sense. Cable industry wants to convert to all digital. FCC says you have an advantage to go all digital by 2009 because in that case, you *don't* need to carry analog an additional 3-years. Yet in the same breath the FCC is preventing cable from going all digital. If anything, FCC is encouraging cable to go all digital by 2009.

If Cable wanted to go all digital, they would go all digital. FCC isn't preventing that at all. If they don't do it, it is because of their own reasons.

Nobody has ever argued (AFAICT) for analog to be carried forever. Could you point out where that has happened?
Right, and it's been awhile since I read it, but what the FCC is saying, if you don't have at least 80% of your subs on a full digital system, then you have to provide analog dual carriage. That is what that digital to analog adapter was all about, Comcast wants to be able to use that as a way around the 80/20 thing. Since they have so many subs, some 25mil, going 80% full digital by the cutoff date is going to be very tough. By using the converter they can say that they are at 80% or better by attaching it to the subs inbound cable feed. I believe that's what their plan is/was anyways.

satellite still scale down to 1400x1080 or so?If they are, it sure doesn't show, SciFi has looked outstanding to me. Viewing Stargate Atlantis, I've never seen any motion blocking, and during scenes inside Atlantis, the detail is incredible.Jim, the scaling down to 1440x1080i has nothing to do with macro blocking (except to make it less likely because of a lower bitrate requirement). Are you sure that you're not looking at 1440x1080i from your satellite? All of the MPEG4 satellite-sourced sample clips that I've seen so far have been either 1280x720p or 1440x1080i. Likely, you'll have to capture some of the transport stream and analyze it to be able to tell without a close-up side-by-side comparison on, say, a 50" screen.

Jim, the scaling down to 1440x1080i has nothing to do with macro blocking (except to make it less likely because of a lower bitrate requirement). Are you sure that you're not looking at 1440x1080i from your satellite? All of the MPEG4 satellite-sourced sample clips that I've seen so far have been either 1280x720p or 1440x1080i. Likely, you'll have to capture some of the transport stream and analyze it to be able to tell without a close-up side-by-side comparison on, say, a 50" screen.

I have no way to capture the D* stream, I don't think anyone else does either, the way DirecTV handles their data. That's always been a problem when comparing PQ. The original D* MPEG2 does look like crap, no question, but I have no issue at all with their new MPEG4 stuff. I tried, especially with the locals, to pick it apart when compared to Comcast, but either my eyes are getting worse overall, or I'm just used to lower quality coming from both providers, but the two feeds look identical to me.

If the MPEG4 sourced clips you've seen are from Dish, then yes, I know that they have gone with 1440x1080i, but I have yet to see anything from DirecTV to support one way or the other that they are down-rezzing their new signals.

My display scheme is the DVR>VP50>Mits 73" 1080i CRT(9"x3) display. I use native output on both the S3 TiVo and the D* HR20.

as I understand it they plan to give digital converters out to everyone that subscribes to anything higher than "basic" and then pull the plug on all analog channels above 32 or so (about 50 channels?) .. that alone should make room for at least 100 more HD channels with no need to scale or compress..

I have no way to capture the D* stream, I don't think anyone else does either, the way DirecTV handles their data.That's not what it says here (http://www.nextcomwireless.com/R5000/home.htm). ;)

Comcast seems more interested in putting cameras on their boxes so they can watch whose watching them.
http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/

Is there anyone in a recently upgraded area that can comment on what time of the day they started receiving new channels? Or is Comcast typically "flipping the switch" in the middle of the night?

When my area 95401 was upgraded Comcast probably flipped the switch in the middle of the night. I checked for new channels and VOD just before leaving for work at 7am on the 6th. Comcast said we would be upgraded on March 5th.

Comcast seems more interested in putting cameras on their boxes so they can watch whose watching them.
http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/I hope that that's a premature April Fool's joke. :eek:

Comcast seems more interested in putting cameras on their boxes so they can watch whose watching them.
http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/
If it's not HD, I don't want to hear about it. :)

I think they should:
1) use currently unused bandwidth on 750/850/1G systems (850 and 1G systems have at least 100MHz available even with existing equipment)
2) move (as needed) some analog expanded basic channels to digital (there's at least 40*6 = 240MHz available there)
3) then use these other techniques like rate shaping (3-per), SDV, etc.

I don't think they should jump to step 3 before exhausting 1 and 2. #1 has room for 34 HD channels (for 850/1G) #2 has room for 80 HD channels)

I also don't think they should do anything unless they have HD channels ready to fill the resulting space.

With all the talk of saving or opening up bandwidth I wonder if anyone listens to any of the music channels on a regular basis. To me, they seem superfluous with Ipods and music servers, dedicated or on computer, becoming the norm (I prefer vinyl). If that's true, then why not eliminate them? In addition, end users have control over what is played rather than listening to what's offered by the channel; another reason to eliminate them. Those who value sound quality over the convenience if any, probably don't tune in to those channels either. Right or wrong?

That change forces QAM people (like me) with expanded basic and no STB's to get a converter for every TV in the house, and would severely limit my current DVR. If Comcast had real support for CableCards, I would also vote for going all digital. As it is, I don't mind a little delay :rolleyes:

I don't know how these converters would function, but surely the most simple way would be to translate digital channels out of the stream and into analog across a set number of mapped channels(so there are very light configuration requirements on the converter hardware) and pass them as analog downstream.

Basically, you would just stick one of these converters into your line at the wall and then you could split your craptastic analog cable as many times from there as your heart desired.

I don't know how these converters would function, but surely the most simple way would be to translate digital channels out of the stream and into analog across a set number of mapped channels(so there are very light configuration requirements on the converter hardware) and pass them as analog downstream.

Basically, you would just stick one of these converters into your line at the wall and then you could split your craptastic analog cable as many times from there as your heart desired.
We had this discussion a few pages back. That technology, isn't what is being used in the adapter. Basically think of the adapter as a DCT-700 stripped of outputs and with no screen.

they work like regular cable boxes, with RF out on ch 3, or a/v out.

they are about the size of a small radar detector. they are not HD of course, and they only have composite video out.

of course you can pay extra ($7 or so) for a HD box.

everyone in the country will need something like it for their old analog TVs by July next year so it's no big deal.

as for the music channels, I doubt they take up very much space, they sound like less than 128kb. all 40 or so of them probably take up less than 1 SD channel.

Man I have been having nothing but problems since I lost a few HD channels Sunday night (which came back Monday night).

Internet is all over the place, my phone will just randomly stop working, and the cable has gone out a few times. Today I had to do a hard reset (pull out battery pull out plug) on the modem to get my phone or internet to work.

Anyone else in the Redwood Shores / Belmont area have the same problem?

Comcast is coming out tomorrow morning, so I hope he can fix it!

That's not what it says here (http://www.nextcomwireless.com/R5000/home.htm). ;)

That only works on their older MPEG2 only boxes. The newer units that do h.264 are not modifiable for R5000 operation. Believe me, I talked to the engineers that worked on the HR series boxes and Nextcomm as well. No go.

If there was, I'd leave Comcast video in a heartbeat (but still would keep locals and HSI :-)).

as for the music channels, I doubt they take up very much space, they sound like less than 128kb. all 40 or so of them probably take up less than 1 SD channel.
I think you meant to say 1 HD channel?

Dig-FM 144Kbps x 30 = 4.32Mbps
DigMus 200Kbps x 48 = 9.60Mbps

13.92Mbps or around 1 720p HD channel

Is there a concerted or organized effort here in the Bay Area to complain about the new triple HD channel to one 38.8 MHz QAM channel mapping exposed by bfdtv here?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1008271

I'm seriously bummed about reduced HD picture quality. If I didn't own a Series 3 Tivo, I would be calling D* this evening to switch back. A came over to Comcast a year ago for the better PQ and the Series 3.

I'd wait to see some evidence of reduced quality in the Bay Area HD Comcast signals before you get too worked up, doesnt sound like we've got it here yet (4/15 may be the time you can tell)....MikeSM and Keenan are doing a pretty good job on that thread already and I'm sure comcast is watching ;)

It will certainly help me decide whether I move back from Dish or not (if they ever finish the Saratoga Upgrade of course)...

I'd wait to see some evidence of reduced quality in the Bay Area HD Comcast signals before you get too worked up, doesnt sound like we've got it here yet
You got it here already. I mentioned earlier my head-end got completely reorganized and HGTV, AETV, and SHO are now on the same channel.

IMO the reason you don't get as many complaints about PQ is we were already getting lowered quality HD channels prior to the reorg.

Anyway after observing a little bit more, I know the 3-per is maxing out the bandwidth. During the daytime HGTV was getting 15Mbps, AETV 9Mbps and SHO 12Mbps with around 2Mbps reserved. During evening it changed to around 12.5Mbps each, with zero in reserve. IMO HGTV needs at least 15Mbps to look decent, giving it 12Mbps is not enough and I could start seeing macroblocking. All the reserve was used up also, so it wasn't going to get better.

AETV always looks kind of crappy to me, but I didn't realize that was because we were getting a reduced quality feed to start with. Keenan posted some FIOS comparisons that indicated AETV is often 18Mbps. I've often seen AETV around 9.5-12Mbps even before it went on 3-per. Keenan explained that also that we were likely getting a packaged version of a bunch of channels that had been rate-reduced.

Is there a concerted or organized effort here in the Bay Area to complain about the new triple HD channel to one 38.8 MHz QAM

A fast-track email link for Comcast complaints.......
http://www.mercextra.com/blogs/vindu/2008/03/21/how-to-fast-track-your-comcast-complaint/

That only works on their older MPEG2 only boxes. The newer units that do h.264 are not modifiable for R5000 operation. Believe me, I talked to the engineers that worked on the HR series boxes and Nextcomm as well. No go.I see from this page (http://www.nextcomwireless.com/R5000/products.htm) that you're right. After talking about Dish and DirecTV andH.264 on the first page, they confess that it's really only Dish that has H.264 support on the next page. Oh, well.

That change forces QAM people (like me) with expanded basic and no STB's to get a converter for every TV in the house, and would severely limit my current DVR. If Comcast had real support for CableCards, I would also vote for going all digital. As it is, I don't mind a little delay :rolleyes:If you have QAM, why would would you need a converter? As for your analog DVR, it's the 21st century. Time for a new one.

Is there an FCC requirement that Comcast carry all those radio stations? I realize that audio doesn't use nearly the bandwidth. But, couldn't they free up some by getting rid of all that? I have a radio in my AVReciver and in my car. I don't need it on my TV, especially when I already get Music Choice.

However, I do seem to remember something about an FCC reg.

There was a huge outcry several years ago when Comcast, or maybe AT&T, removed the radio stations. There are many folks who are loyal to their local radio. Why? I don't know, I'm not one of them.

I think you meant to say 1 HD channel?

Dig-FM 144Kbps x 30 = 4.32Mbps
DigMus 200Kbps x 48 = 9.60Mbps

13.92Mbps or around 1 720p HD channel

why do they sound so horrible if they are using that high of bitrates?

I would have guessed more like 96Kbps based on the sound quality.

AETV always looks kind of crappy to me, Do they actually have any HD material on that channel? All I ever see is stretched SD.

Do they actually have any HD material on that channel? All I ever see is stretched SD.

The Sopranos and CSI: Miami are HD. Some of their shows, such as The First 48 are starting to be produced in HD.

fitprod

If you have QAM, why would would you need a converter? As for your analog DVR, it's the 21st century. Time for a new one.

Because when they move expanded basic to digital it will be encrypted. And the DVR is QAM. Like I said, CableCard would be the answer, but the writing on the wall says it will likely die on the vine (more and more TVs sold these days do not have it).

why do they sound so horrible if they are using that high of bitrates?

I would have guessed more like 96Kbps based on the sound quality.
Could be many reasons. Why does upconverted SD look like crap on an HD channel? Garbage in Garbage out? Extra video frames taking up bandwidth? I don't know.

I'm going based on the bandwidth reported by a stream analyzer and not commenting on quality.

In any event, the original point was valid, even if you got rid of all the music channels, that gives you 1 720p HD channel. Not a huge gain. I just wanted to correct the comparison to 1 SD channel when it should have been 1 HD channel.

Using the 100MHz availabe on 860/1G systems is a much bigger gain. Moving, as necessary the 40+ (240MHz) expanded basic channels to digital is a much bigger gain.

Do they actually have any HD material on that channel? All I ever see is stretched SD.
I wish someone could tell me. The FIOS AETV was listed at 18Mbps. Are they really sending stretched SD (upconverted to HD) at such a high bitrate on FIOS or are we getting some crappy version of AETV? When AETV was showing Law&Order in the evening, they bumped up the bitrate from 9 to 12Mbps. It still looks pretty bad to me and in the process they lowered the bitrate of HGTV to 12 from 15.

The Sopranos was definitely stretched SD when I saw it.
(and censored too... wow I'll be sure to watch that...)

So are the movies like the Matrix.

The Sopranos was definitely stretched SD when I saw it.
(and censored too... wow I'll be sure to watch that...)

So are the movies like the Matrix.

Was it an early season of Sopranos, I saw bits of 5 & 6 and they were correct. I have to admit, the editing isn't horrible, but I'd never get in the habit of watching the edited version.

fitprod

why do they sound so horrible if they are using that high of bitrates?

I would have guessed more like 96Kbps based on the sound quality.

That's not a high bitrate, that's barely acceptable mp3 rate. Standard CCDA is 10 times the bitrate those Dig-FM channels are, and 200kbps mp3 doesn't sound so good either. Cram all that through an RF cable system and it's no wonder they sound like crap.

I wish someone could tell me. The FIOS AETV was listed at 18Mbps. Are they really sending stretched SD (upconverted to HD) at such a high bitrate on FIOS or are we getting some crappy version of AETV? When AETV was showing Law&Order in the evening, they bumped up the bitrate from 9 to 12Mbps. It still looks pretty bad to me and in the process they lowered the bitrate of HGTV to 12 from 15.

The Matrix is on A&E in HD right now, replays later tonight, although that's not a real good test as it's film-based material.

There are still duplicate QAM channels right now in Sunnyvale Area... 110 and 117 both show KGO. And they go reducing quality on the others... I'm starting to think if it gets as bad as I think - seeing channels around 9-11mbps instead of 15 I'll just go to satellite. It'll probably be cheaper too, on demand bs isn't enough to keep me.

The Matrix is on A&E in HD right now, replays later tonight, although that's not a real good test as it's film-based material.

It's unwatchable here. The video glitches and freezes and pixellates while audio keeps going. In addition it's cropped HD widescreen. Jurassic Park 3 on TBSHD also froze for a second but only once so far as I write this.

It's unwatchable here. The video glitches and freezes and pixellates while audio keeps going. In addition it's cropped HD widescreen. Jurassic Park 3 on TBSHD also froze for a second but only once so far as I write this.

I noticed it too. Very annoying. I am wondering if they are capping the bit-rate with this "HD Lite" idea I've been reading about:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=998819

Maybe a side effect of the 3-per?

I just started to record it via DirecTV. If you guys can note some time stamps/points in the film where you see problems, then I'll look at them on the DirecTV version and see if they're there as well.

I started trying to watch it when Neo's friends showed up at the door and he sold them the program; the club scene was also pixellated and freezing. Then I switched it to JP3. Strange that as I write this (11pm) the picture is now smooth without glitches or freezes. Check that, it just pixellated as Trinity and Tank were hugging after Dozer's death. The commercials aren't glitching.

Because when they move expanded basic to digital it will be encrypted.If they are not encrypted in analog form, why would they be encrypted when moved to digital?

There was a huge outcry several years ago when Comcast, or maybe AT&T, removed the radio stations. There are many folks who are loyal to their local radio. Why? I don't know, I'm not one of them.People are idiots.

If they are not encrypted in analog form, why would they be encrypted when moved to digital?

They're not, Comcast already said what you are getting unencrypted now will stay that way when they shift to all digital. That's why I don't understand peoples reluctance in getting rid of analog, other than the fact you have to have digital equipment. What you get now in analog is what you'll get when they shift to all digital.

Laters,
Mikef5

People are idiots.

Not idiots. The whole thing started because a few areas in the Bay Area are in dead spots, as far as receiving radio stations and wanted to have Comcast ( who had just taken over from AT&T ) to put them back on their system, so Comcast left them on for everyone. They don't take up that much bandwidth and it helped out those areas that have problems with radio reception.

Laters,
Mikef5

Not idiots. The whole thing started because a few areas in the Bay Area are in dead spots, as far as receiving radio stations and wanted to have Comcast ( who had just taken over from AT&T ) to put them back on their system, so Comcast left them on for everyone. They don't take up that much bandwidth and it helped out those areas that have problems with radio reception. Mikef5
I'm one of those people who live in an area where 'local' FM from San Francisco was almost impossible to get. I live on the flats in Santa Rosa and really missed 102.1 classical station and KQED primarily for "Prairie Home Companion".

Fortunately I have DishNetwork and can get classical radio from them but like the local flavor of KDFC.

Strange thing now though, I upgraded my sound system to an Onkyo 705 AV receiver and I now get a nice clear signal from both KQED and KDFC. :)

Hi everyone. I'm in Fremont, using Comcast. Until recently (within the last week), I was able to use KNTV NBC's QAM channel on my computer's tuner with no issues. Recently I noticed recordings on NBC failing, and this morning I checked the channel and it reports that it's encrypted. I was using 747MHz for NBC QAM.

I also checked for the channel with my TV, rescanning for both analog and digital channels, and KNTV NBC was not amongst the ATSC/QAM channels it found. All other QAM stations seem to work normally.

Anyone else notice this change? I haven't contacted Comcast yet, but I'll probably do that this week if I can't resolve it.

EDIT: I found it, it seems to be on 95-2. Now I just need to figure out my computer's tuner's equivalent.
EDIT2: 93MHz for all those interested. I guess I answered my own questions!

It seems that the recent system upgrades and changes in channel assignments have broken the PSIP data for some of the HD locals, which is why your TV doesn't report all of the HD QAM channels. You'll likely find that KNTV is among the unidentified QAM channels that the TV found in its scan, but its probably on a new channel number. It's not showing up as "11.1" because the PSIP virtual-channel data are AWOL on the new channel. It wouldn't hurt to report this to Comcast and it may even accelerate their fixing it.

When I did a scan on my friends Samsung TV, CBS was not showing up at 5-1 either nor was FOX (KTVU) at 2-1.

peter

why do they sound so horrible if they are using that high of bitrates?

I would have guessed more like 96Kbps based on the sound quality.

I think they are MPEG-2 layer 2 not the layer 3 that is used for mp3. You need at least 192K for layer 2 audio to sound decent.

Not idiots. The whole thing started because a few areas in the Bay Area are in dead spots, as far as receiving radio stations and wanted to have Comcast ( who had just taken over from AT&T ) to put them back on their system, so Comcast left them on for everyone. They don't take up that much bandwidth and it helped out those areas that have problems with radio reception.

Laters,
Mikef5

if anyone's watching - if Comcast put KPIG in the digital FM lineup it would be spectacular. How would it be to have all piggy ears to hear "107 oink 5 and on Comcast Digital Cable . . .

Instead there is the same old drek, with a few other unique stations - but too few.

Strange thing now though, I upgraded my sound system to an Onkyo 705 AV receiver and I now get a nice clear signal from both KQED and KDFC. :)See? It has nothing to do with living in a dead spot. It has to do with crappy equipment, which is not Comcast's responsibility.

OTOH, if they don't take up much bandwidth, I guess it doesn't matter. There are a helluva lot of them, tho. That's why I wondered how much bandwidth they took up. For instance, if all of them together amounted to one HD channel, I'd be all for 86ing them, and adding that HD channel.

See? It has nothing to do with living in a dead spot. It has to do with crappy equipment, which is not Comcast's responsibility.

OTOH, if they don't take up much bandwidth, I guess it doesn't matter. There are a helluva lot of them, tho. That's why I wondered how much bandwidth they took up. For instance, if all of them together amounted to one HD channel, I'd be all for 86ing them, and adding that HD channel.

...or one and half HD channels as it seems Comcast is doing now.

They're not, Comcast already said what you are getting unencrypted now will stay that way when they shift to all digital.
Really? That wasn't my understanding and it doesn't match their current practice. The ADS versions of expanded basic are almost all encrypted. The ADS versions of limited basic are not encrypted.

My understanding was expanded basic would be (and currently is) encrypted when it moved to all digital. Comcast could then eliminate the need to use filters to control whether someone received expanded basic.

Really? That wasn't my understanding and it doesn't match their current practice. The ADS versions of expanded basic are almost all encrypted. The ADS versions of limited basic are not encrypted.

My understanding was expanded basic would be (and currently is) encrypted when it moved to all digital. Comcast could then eliminate the need to use filters to control whether someone received expanded basic.

What I was told was that the channels 2 thru 77 which are analog now and unencrypted will remain that way when they shift to all digital, anything else is subject to encryption.

Laters,
Mikef5

Really? That wasn't my understanding and it doesn't match their current practice. The ADS versions of expanded basic are almost all encrypted. The ADS versions of limited basic are not encrypted.

My understanding was expanded basic would be (and currently is) encrypted when it moved to all digital. Comcast could then eliminate the need to use filters to control whether someone received expanded basic.

Expanded Basic has to be encrypted, otherwise there'd be no way to keep Limited Basic subs from receiving them. Limited Basic subs would get the additional channels of Expanded Basic for the cost of Limited Basic - never going to happen.

What I was told was that the channels 2 thru 77 which are analog now and unencrypted will remain that way when they shift to all digital, anything else is subject to encryption.

Laters,
Mikef5

What they said makes sense, if you consider that Expanded Basic channels that are blocked to Limited Basic subs now are essentially "encrypted" by that blocking/filter, then yes, what is unencrypted today will remain unencrypted "tomorrow". The only unencrypted channels you're likely to see are Limited Basic channels(local broadcast/community access, and whatever shopping channels Comcast decides to throw in).

What they said makes sense, if you consider that Expanded Basic channels that are blocked to Limited Basic subs now are essentially "encrypted" by that blocking/filter, then yes, what is unencrypted today will remain unencrypted "tomorrow". The only unencrypted channels you're likely to see are Limited Basic channels(local broadcast/community access, and whatever shopping channels Comcast decides to throw in).

Right, and that was my original point: I can presently receive all the Expanded Basic channels without a STB on my various receivers/DVRs. After the move to digital, I will need STB's everywhere even though all my equipment is QAM capable.

If they are not encrypted in analog form, why would they be encrypted when moved to digital?

They're not, Comcast already said what you are getting unencrypted now will stay that way when they shift to all digital.
I think you guys are confusing Limited Basic and Expanded Basic.

Limited Basic (ch. 2 - 30 or so) : Not encrypted.
Expanded Basic (till ch 80 or so) : Encrypted (excpept a couple of channels like CNN)

I think you guys are confusing Limited Basic and Expanded Basic.

Limited Basic (ch. 2 - 30 or so) : Not encrypted.
Expanded Basic (till ch 80 or so) : Encrypted (excpept a couple of channels like CNN)
Raghu,

I'm not confused at all, again I'll repeat what I was told. The channels 2-77 which are now analog and unencrypted will remain that way when they shift everything to all digital. I now receive channels 2-77, analog, unencrypted and I expect that to remain that way when they shift to all digital. I am not in an ADS system so I have no idea what is being done in those areas and I can't speak to that, but until Comcast tells me different that is what I will expect to happen and I will go by that.
Now, what may happen is that they may do away with the Limited and Expanded Basic packages and combine it to a single Basic package once they shift to all digital. If they do that then I have no idea on what would be included in the clear or what would be encrypted. I'll have to ask and see if this is a possibility once they shift to all digital.


Laters,
Mikef5

I'm pretty sure the digital versions of "expanded basic" ie 33-82 are already encrypted in ADS areas.

I just have a clear-QAM tuner, it gets a bunch of SD stations on 94.xxx or 96.xxx, about 2 dozen of them I guess, I don't use it much... but then there's a ton more than it says "this channel cannot be decoded" or so.

I'm pretty sure the digital versions of "expanded basic" ie 33-82 are already encrypted in ADS areas.Yep, they are.

See? It has nothing to do with living in a dead spot. It has to do with crappy equipment, which is not Comcast's responsibility.
Gary,
It wasn't crappy equipment, but an Onkyo Integra stereo FM tuner, about 10 or so years old and designed (at the time) to be the most advanced FM stereo tuner on the market. That was why I was surprised that my new Onkyo 705 actually had a better tuner.


OTOH, if they don't take up much bandwidth, I guess it doesn't matter. There are a helluva lot of them, tho. That's why I wondered how much bandwidth they took up. For instance, if all of them together amounted to one HD channel, I'd be all for 86ing them, and adding that HD channel.
Since I now get decent FM reception, I also don't care if Comcast provides the service, but I am sure that there are plenty of people who are happy they do.

Raghu,

I'm not confused at all, again I'll repeat what I was told. The channels 2-77 which are now analog and unencrypted will remain that way when they shift everything to all digital. I now receive channels 2-77, analog, unencrypted and I expect that to remain that way when they shift to all digital. I am not in an ADS system so I have no idea what is being done in those areas and I can't speak to that, but until Comcast tells me different that is what I will expect to happen and I will go by that.
Now, what may happen is that they may do away with the Limited and Expanded Basic packages and combine it to a single Basic package once they shift to all digital. If they do that then I have no idea on what would be included in the clear or what would be encrypted. I'll have to ask and see if this is a possibility once they shift to all digital.


Laters,
Mikef5

They won't combine the 2 packages, that would mean Limited Basic customers would be forced to purchase even more programming they didn't want, not to mention it would screw up existing franchise agreements about providing the local channels at specific rates.

Someone is giving you some mis-information. If the Expanded Basic channels are to be in-the-clear/unencrypted in the future why aren't they available to Limited Basic subs now?

That analog filter blocker on Expanded Basic now is essentially the same as being encrypted.

Since I now get decent FM reception, I also don't care if Comcast provides the service, but I am sure that there are plenty of people who are happy they do.We don't need to care about those people. ;)

Expanded Basic has to be encrypted, otherwise there'd be no way to keep Limited Basic subs from receiving them.
I think the main point is they want to get away from notch filters. If they really wanted to, they could group expanded basic on 4-5 channels within the current notch filter range, but why do that when encryption can accomplish this with virtually zero cost.

I'm pretty sure 750mhz areas have room for at least a couple more HD channels, and 860-1G areas even more.

I mean they have enough room to let 720 sit there with "HD SPORTS" logo running 98% of the time, I don't think they are backed up that much.

Plus they can (and do) move a channel or 2 to digital when they need a bit more room (like they did with TVGuide recently).

Obviously moving 30-40 analog channels will free up a lot more room. Removing the music/FM channels is not likely to be seriously considered.

Thing like SDV and/or MPEG4 down the road are options they are looking at.

Speaking of more HD channels - I noticed in the guide for SCIFI it now lists HD programs as "HD"...

I'm not confused at all, again I'll repeat what I was told. The channels 2-77 which are now analog and unencrypted will remain that way when they shift everything to all digital. I now receive channels 2-77, analog, unencrypted and I expect that to remain that way when they shift to all digital. I am not in an ADS system so I have no idea what is being done in those areas and I can't speak to that, but until Comcast tells me different that is what I will expect to happen and I will go by that.
Mike, I have all the respect for the information you forward to this forum, but on this point I think there is some miscommunication somewhere in the chain. I'm sure you heard what you wrote, but there is much evidence that says otherwise.

That analog filter blocker on Expanded Basic now is essentially the same as being encrypted.
Logically it is serving the same function as encryption but the implementation has side effects that make them different. Encryption means there is no way to avoid additional hardware from the cable company. Notch filters can be removed and cable-ready TVs will work with no additional hardware from the cable company.

They don't even need to remove the notch filter. If they are subscribed to limited-basic only, they will continue to get 2-32 or so in analog... with or without the filter, because that's all there will be. There's no need for a truck roll even, the transition will be seamless.

If they are sub'd to Expanded/Standard basic, then yes they will need a digital converter on every TV. But that's no different than satellite now, and ALL tv in the country will be, after July 2009.

Hi all,

I am totally new to this. I live in the Bay area.
I bought an Panny HDTV with NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuner from costco.
I was told that if I got basic comcast, I would get local HDTV channels by the TV tuner.

So i got basic comcast but so far I don't get anything beside those basic channels.

What do I need to do to get the local channel though comcast? Just a note, I actually got a lot of local HDTV channels when I first get the TV by scanning... After the storm, it went away.

Thanks,
TP

Mike, I have all the respect for the information you forward to this forum, but on this point I think there is some miscommunication somewhere in the chain. I'm sure you heard what you wrote, but there is much evidence that says otherwise.

I agree. I would give Comcast huge kudos if they did what you said they are doing, but everyone has reported that the configuration is exactly the opposite of what you ared saying it's supposed to be.

If they did that, then anyone with a digital qam capable set would be able to receive the digital version of expanded basic just like they do with the analog version of expanded basic - no STB, and no extra remote control required. This would make it much easier for them to turn off analog channels and free room on the plant for HD.

It makes all the sense in the world, but has far as I can tell, no comcast market does that, and this market never does anything new first. If I'm proven wrong, I will be very happy though, and sing Comcast's praises for doing something that makes a lot of sense for both them and their customers.

Are there markets where they have already turned off the "expanded" analog channels?

I'm pretty sure 750mhz areas have room for at least a couple more HD channels, and 860-1G areas even more.



Until they deploy STBs that are capable of tuning frequencies between 860MHz and 1Ghz that extra bandwidth is useless. Motorola has developed them, but I'm not aware of any being in service yet.

Are there markets where they have already turned off the "expanded" analog channels?

I think they've already done it in Chicago, but I'm not positive.

Mike, I have all the respect for the information you forward to this forum, but on this point I think there is some miscommunication somewhere in the chain. I'm sure you heard what you wrote, but there is much evidence that says otherwise.

SFHub,

You are probably correct because this was told to me a very long time ago, think 3-4 years ago, when I first came to this forum and I'm sure a lot of the original plans may have changed in that time. Also, since my area has just been upgraded and we are not ADS I really can't say if what you say is happening in other areas is happening here but I've read most of your posts and you are pretty accurate in your findings so I'll assume that's what's happening and that's not making me happy. Comcast really needs to get these upgrades done and consolidate their packages so what's available in one area is available in all areas and at the same prices. Too many packages that are different in different areas, too many areas that don't have the same bandwidth available. Hopefully, this will get done before the end of the year.

Laters,
Mikef5

SFHub,

You are probably correct because this was told to me a very long time ago, think 3-4 years ago, when I first came to this forum and I'm sure a lot of the original plans may have changed in that time. Also, since my area has just been upgraded and we are not ADS I really can't say if what you say is happening in other areas is happening here but I've read most of your posts and you are pretty accurate in your findings so I'll assume that's what's happening and that's not making me happy. Comcast really needs to get these upgrades done and consolidate their packages so what's available in one area is available in all areas and at the same prices. Too many packages that are different in different areas, too many areas that don't have the same bandwidth available. Hopefully, this will get done before the end of the year.

Laters,
Mikef5

Sending out the old analog stations as unencrypted digital should be a no brainer for them. The FCC won't let people sell TV's that don't have digital tuners in them, and all the sets that can recieve OTA digital also can do QAM digital. This is a huge win for Comcast in reducing the impact of moving channels to digital, but it requires them to send the channels in the clear, just like they do with analog today.

They should be doing this TODAY, as it would encourage people to buy these sets and begin removing barriers to digital conversion. It also would help them compete with DBS since the digital picture is often better than analog, and the ability to avoid a STB (and the associated truck roll to install it) also enables them to save on capex.

They should be able to insert PSIP info in the SD digital stream to identify the channel and name to the TV too, helping users to program their sets too.

But instead of doing things like this, and moving analog stations to digital, they squish the quality out of HD channels and make themselves less competitive. This is not the way to win.

Sending out the old analog stations as unencrypted digital should be a no brainer for them. The FCC won't let people sell TV's that don't have digital tuners in them, and all the sets that can recieve OTA digital also can do QAM digital. This is a huge win for Comcast in reducing the impact of moving channels to digital, but it requires them to send the channels in the clear, just like they do with analog today.

They should be doing this TODAY, as it would encourage people to buy these sets and begin removing barriers to digital conversion. It also would help them compete with DBS since the digital picture is often better than analog, and the ability to avoid a STB (and the associated truck roll to install it) also enables them to save on capex.

They should be able to insert PSIP info in the SD digital stream to identify the channel and name to the TV too, helping users to program their sets too.

But instead of doing things like this, and moving analog stations to digital, they squish the quality out of HD channels and make themselves less competitive. This is not the way to win.

Just so I understand what you're saying, you're suggesting that Comcast "give away" those Expanded Basic channels to everyone that has Limited Basic, for free?

(maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet..:p )

The FCC won't let people sell TV's that don't have digital tuners in them, and all the sets that can recieve OTA digital also can do QAM digital.
FCC has only said TVs must have an ATSC/OTA digital tuner (phased plan based on size of TV screens)

FCC hasn't said all TVs must have QAM digital tuner.

It isn't true that all the sets that can receive OTA also can do QAM.

FCC has only said TVs must have an ATSC/OTA digital tuner (phased plan based on size of TV screens)

FCC hasn't said all TVs must have QAM digital tuner.

It isn't true that all the sets that can receive OTA also can do QAM.

...but it does appear that any ATSC tuner also has QAM...(even those that don't advertise the fact)

Just so I understand what you're saying, you're suggesting that Comcast "give away" those Expanded Basic channels to everyone that has Limited Basic, for free?

(maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet..:p )


If they put the QAM carriers in the right place, they will "give them away" to only the people who they "give them away" to now. :-)

In other words, they already have a solution that seems to work for separating the limited basic users from the expanded basic users in the analog domain. If they chop off a few analog channels to make more room for HD, they can move the digital versions of those channels into that spectrum and only the users who can receive them will be able to decode them. If the user has an STB, then they have even more control of the lineup.

Right now, if you are a limited basic user, but have HSI service, you can get expanded basic for free. At least that's the case in many systems in the bay area. The limited basic subs have low pass filters on their drops. If you have a cable modem, those channels are higher up, and therefore the low pass filter needs to be removed for it to function.

This seems to be OK with Comcast, though they could install a broadband notch that would work the same way. If they used the notch on the drop, then they would just make sure the expanded basic digital carriers were covered by the notch they use.

This isn't that hard to make work.

...but it does appear that any ATSC tuner also has QAM...(even those that don't advertise the fact)

Exactly, the chipsets that do ATSC and QAM have much higher volumes than anything that does OTA alone, so practically, no TV vendor ships an OTA only tuner because it's cheaper to use a part that does both.

The limited basic subs have low pass filters on their drops.No, the limited basic subs have band-stop filters on their drops that block from about rf 30 to rf 75. Both lower and higher channels are passed along fine. If that were not true, then Comcast would be in trouble with the FCC for putting all of their HD locals above rf 30!

Regarding QAM v. ATSC tuners, it may be that the majority of DTVs these days have both rather than ATSC only, but there are many additional hw and sw bits needed for QAM reception that add to the cost of a QAM+ATSC solution.

Exactly, the chipsets that do ATSC and QAM have much higher volumes than anything that does OTA alone, so practically, no TV vendor ships an OTA only tuner because it's cheaper to use a part that does both.
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/499437

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9218020#post9218020

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10172136#post10172136

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9793260#post9793260

The point I was making is not how many TVs do or don't have QAM tuner.

FCC does not require a QAM tuner. Your post made it seem like they did.

If your post had said many tuner components support both 8VSB and QAM, there wouldn't have been any disagreement.

http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/499437

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9218020#post9218020

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10172136#post10172136

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9793260#post9793260

The point I was making is not how many TVs do or don't have QAM tuner.

FCC does not require a QAM tuner. Your post made it seem like they did.

If your post had said many tuner components support both 8VSB and QAM, there wouldn't have been any disagreement.

The FCC clearly does not require QAM. Almost all TV's have both QAM and ATSC tuners. I think we can agree on that.

I'm watching the Lakers-Warriors game on FSN-HD right now. Anyone else having sporadic PQ issues?

Go Lakers!!!

Sending out the old analog stations as unencrypted digital should be a no brainer for them. The FCC won't let people sell TV's that don't have digital tuners in them, and all the sets that can recieve OTA digital also can do QAM digital. This is a huge win for Comcast in reducing the impact of moving channels to digital, but it requires them to send the channels in the clear, just like they do with analog today.

They should be doing this TODAY, as it would encourage people to buy these sets and begin removing barriers to digital conversion. It also would help them compete with DBS since the digital picture is often better than analog, and the ability to avoid a STB (and the associated truck roll to install it) also enables them to save on capex.

They should be able to insert PSIP info in the SD digital stream to identify the channel and name to the TV too, helping users to program their sets too.

I don't think the choice so simple for Comcast. Use of QAM tuners is unusable to all but the very tech savvy. Even with proper PSIP information, it is quite tough and there are too many variations on how different manufactures of TV (even with in different models) implement these tuners. It will be huge nightmare for Comcast to support it officially.

If someone really does not want an extra box or remote, they should get a TV with cable card. Here cablecard is doing exactly what it is designed for, w.r.t cable companies : it lets them account for everything that a customers receives.

I think better thing to demand from Comcast is to allow 3-4 free CableCards and not be too stingy about it.

I'm watching the Lakers-Warriors game on FSN-HD right now. Anyone else having sporadic PQ issues?

Go Lakers!!!

I think Comcast flipped the switch to have all Laker fans get a bad picture. :D

Seriously, I've been watching for about 15 minutes and haven't seen any issues.

Right now, if you are a limited basic user, but have HSI service, you can get expanded basic for free. At least that's the case in many systems in the bay area.
I am pretty sure this is not true in most of south bay, or I don't know any town here where this is true.

I helped install HSI this afternoon at my clients house, and the installer had to remove the filter to get HSI to work. I didn't check the TV, but I assume they can get what used to be filtered now.

No, the limited basic subs have band-stop filters on their drops that block from about rf 30 to rf 75. Both lower and higher channels are passed along fine. If that were not true, then Comcast would be in trouble with the FCC for putting all of their HD locals above rf 30!

Regarding QAM v. ATSC tuners, it may be that the majority of DTVs these days have both rather than ATSC only, but there are many additional hw and sw bits needed for QAM reception that add to the cost of a QAM+ATSC solution.

Fair enough, though I think there are still some old low-pass filters in the system from olden days. In my area, KICU is at ch 29, so that must be below the notch. And I still hear stories from people who have expanded basic plus HSI that get expanded basic for free, so they aren't as diligent in some cases about installing the notches...

In any case, I outlined how this might be done if they used a broadband notch as they do today. They still can do it, and without that much hassle. The whole point is to be able to move analog channels to digital, and all they have to do is place the digital equivalents of the analog channels they remove in the notch, and they will not have a problem. Easy to do.

I'm watching the Lakers-Warriors game on FSN-HD right now. Anyone else having sporadic PQ issues?

Go Lakers!!!

i watched the game and suddenly a rugby match broke out?

I don't think the choice so simple for Comcast. Use of QAM tuners is unusable to all but the very tech savvy. Even with proper PSIP information, it is quite tough and there are too many variations on how different manufactures of TV (even with in different models) implement these tuners. It will be huge nightmare for Comcast to support it officially.

If someone really does not want an extra box or remote, they should get a TV with cable card. Here cablecard is doing exactly what it is designed for, w.r.t cable companies : it lets them account for everything that a customers receives.

I think better thing to demand from Comcast is to allow 3-4 free CableCards and not be too stingy about it.

Noone is making new TV's with cablecard, or at least very very few sets have it now. Cablecard has proved to be too hard for vendors to certify and make work, and so you don't see it in CE hear anymore. Even the highest end sony sets today don't have cablecard. It's not a solution, not because it couldn't have been, but because cablelabs made it too hard on anyone trying to build solutions with it. I believe they did it deliberately to force people into using their STB's and preventing others from being successful in producing devices they don't control. Now they are hosed somewhat because of that bad decision.

If someone really does not want an extra box or remote, they should get a TV with cable card.
Dinosaur alert. CableCARDs in TVs are virtually extinct.

Noone is making new TV's with cablecard, or at least very very few sets have it now.
Yes, it depends on how badly you want to avoid extra box and a remote. It looks pretty obvious to me that Comcast would not make Extended Basic free nor will it replace one filter with another.

It also would help them compete with DBS since the digital picture is often better than analog, and the ability to avoid a STB (and the associated truck roll to install it) also enables them to save on capex.


I beg to differ -- I'm very disappointed with the ADS employed in my area (94089, upgraded last Nov). It's not that the digital can't look better than the analog, it's just that it (currently) doesn't, IMHO. Depending on the channel, PQ ranges from fine to crap (way too many artifacts).

In fact, I'm seriously considering calling and asking to be switched off of ADS, back to analog. Anyone ever tried this? Is it even possible?

I've had limited basic in Mountain View for the past 14+ years. I've had cable modem service on and off many times during that period, all with the expanded basic notch filter installed.

At my parents' place in Moraga, Comcast did have to remove a filter to let the cable modem signal through, but that was NOT the expanded basic filter.

At both places, ADS looks much much better than analog.

I arrived home yesterday only to find that Comcast had come by earlier that afternoon and disconnected my service from the pole. Of course I was but a little more than upset since I have their full line of service (Digital Voice, HSI(Blast), and the Premium Cable Sub). When I then called Comcast to complain about the fact that I had been physically disconnected the CSR kept insisting on checking to see if there was an outage in my area despite the fact that I informed him that another member in my family had actually seen a Comcast employee on the pole physically disconnecting the cable from the pole. After about 10 - 15 minutes on the phone and being on hold with the CSR they told me that there was no notes in the system about someone coming out and unhooking the line. After I explained to them how someone saw the physical disconnection take place he finally agreed to send someone out the next day to take care of the problem. My question for everyone here is since we are becoming more, and more dependent on one company for communications (Comcast) is it acceptable to have to wait 24 hours for resolution to the type of issue I am having with them. I guess this is an example of the left hand not knowing what the right is doing. For anyone with a cable card, will I have to go through reauthorizing the card after they hook me back up to the network? Thanks

Yes, it depends on how badly you want to avoid extra box and a remote. It looks pretty obvious to me that Comcast would not make Extended Basic free nor will it replace one filter with another.

<rant>
I suspect this whole discussion has little to due with filters, STBs, or cost savings and it has everything to do with control. At the end of the day, the more Comcast can control how you view the content, the more opportunity there is to increase revenue.

The concept of fair use really only exists in a theoretical sense now, and everyone is assumed to be a criminal.
</rant>

Kevin

I arrived home yesterday only to find that Comcast had come by earlier that afternoon and disconnected my service from the pole. Of course I was but a little more than upset since I have their full line of service (Digital Voice, HSI(Blast), and the Premium Cable Sub). When I then called Comcast to complain about the fact that I had been physically disconnected the CSR kept insisting on checking to see if there was an outage in my area despite the fact that I informed him that another member in my family had actually seen a Comcast employee on the pole physically disconnecting the cable from the pole. After about 10 - 15 minutes on the phone and being on hold with the CSR they told me that there was no notes in the system about someone coming out and unhooking the line. After I explained to them how someone saw the physical disconnection take place he finally agreed to send someone out the next day to take care of the problem. My question for everyone here is since we are becoming more, and more dependent on one company for communications (Comcast) is it acceptable to have to wait 24 hours for resolution to the type of issue I am having with them. I guess this is an example of the left hand not knowing what the right is doing. For anyone with a cable card, will I have to go through reauthorizing the card after they hook me back up to the network? Thanks

Demand a credit for at least the time during which you had no service.

Here's their first reponse. I'll post more as I intend for them to actually answer my questions.

Dear Mr. Fryer,

Thank you for contacting the Comcast Office of Rick Germano, Senior Vice President of Customer Operations. I would like to assure you that Comcast is determined to offer our customer's with the best quality service and software available. This is currently being researched by our executives and will be addressed. I would like to thank you for being this to our attention. I appreciate you providing us the opportunity to assist you.

Sincerely,
Maria Baptist

Office of Rick Germano



Original Message Follows:
-------------------------
The following information was submitted from the Comcast Web site:

Inquiry: I'm very displeased about the new, seemingly unannounced, practice of mapping 3 HD channels to one 38.8 Mbs QAM channel. I recently moved from DirecTV to Comcast due to the better picture quality available on Comcast and Comcast's TIVO support.
Can you please explain why Comcast is taking this step?
If the 3 HD per QAM mapping becomes a standard practice, I will have to consider other alternatives. Thanks for your attention to my concern and question, CFryer

P.S. Here's a tech forum entry that exposes the practice:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1008271

For anyone with a cable card, will I have to go through reauthorizing the card after they hook me back up to the network? Thanks

As long as the cable card is in the same TV/STB, you are OK, a disconnect won't result in need to reauthorized the cable cards. I have them in my Tivo S3 for 1.5 years now. The only time I have to call in to get the card reauthorized is when I upgraded the HDD inside the S3. Otherwise I've powered off/on the S3, disconnected it from cable to rewire things, never had to reauthorize the cable cards.

You don't get free cable TV with HSI.

#1 they charge you more for HSI if you don't sub. to cable TV, the charge is about the equivilent to the charge for "basic" cable (not a coincidence)

#2 they put a trap on your line that blocks almost all analog TV channels - meaning you get marginal reception of ch.2, nothing between 3 and 70 or so, and then you get 72 up thru whatever is the last channel

believe me I tried it a few years ago.

You don't get free cable TV with HSI.

#1 they charge you more for HSI if you don't sub. to cable TV, the charge is about the equivilent to the charge for "basic" cable (not a coincidence)

#2 they put a trap on your line that blocks almost all analog TV channels - meaning you get marginal reception of ch.2, nothing between 3 and 70 or so, and then you get 72 up thru whatever is the last channel

believe me I tried it a few years ago.

I was talking about folks who had limited basic and also got HSI (a popular combination for DBS subs). Given that they hit you with a surcharge on HSI if you take no video from Comcast, it's almost exactly the same price for limited basic + HSI, as it is for HSI alone.

Comcast's practices may have changed over time. There are definitely people who got expanded basic in addition to their limited basic when they got HSI. I am not sure that's the case for new installs, but was the case at least a 3-4 years ago, and at least a couple folks I know still have that situation. They are DBS subs so they don't actually watch those channels, but they did come in from the plant.

Here's their first reponse. I'll post more as I intend for them to actually answer my questions.

It might be good if everyone emailed him... :-) Or send cc him on a complaint to the FCC's media bureau. You can file an electronic complaint with the media bureau here: https://esupport.fcc.gov/sform2000/new_complaints.action?request_locale=en Select form 2000E. Or you can use 2000A if you feel this is a case of deceptive marketing.

But it will be better still if a bunch of us show up at Stanford on April 17th and tell the FCC about it. :D

But it will be better still if a bunch of us show up at Stanford on April 17th and tell the FCC about it. :D
Why would FCC care about 3-pak if it doesn't involve broadcast channels on cable?

You don't get free cable TV with HSI.

#1 they charge you more for HSI if you don't sub. to cable TV, the charge is about the equivilent to the charge for "basic" cable (not a coincidence)

#2 they put a trap on your line that blocks almost all analog TV channels - meaning you get marginal reception of ch.2, nothing between 3 and 70 or so, and then you get 72 up thru whatever is the last channel

believe me I tried it a few years ago.
I don't think anyone has a problem believing you are not supposed to get free cable TV with HSI.

However, it does happen. Sometimes they just forget to put the filter on. Sometimes it causes problems and they take it off. Sometimes they run out of filters and never come back to finish the block.

Why would FCC care about 3-pak if it doesn't involve broadcast channels on cable?

This FCC seems to care about anything the cable guys are doing to hurt consumers (though they don't seem to care about what the Bell's are doing to hurt consumers :rolleyes:) . Certainly if they care so much about degrading **********, they should care about comcast degrading video.

My question for everyone here is since we are becoming more, and more dependent on one company for communications (Comcast) is it acceptable to have to wait 24 hours for resolution to the type of issue I am having with them.

Considering this knocks out home phone service, which means no E911 for 24 hours, I do not find this is acceptable in the least. Sure many have cell phones, but what if your home has an intruder in the middle of the night? I know for me, first instinct is to grab that home phone and dial 911.

But with your situation, that can't happen. Could be a life or death kind of thing. I agree with another poster that you should demand a credit and give this example as to why it is vital to have these problems (Especially digital voice) resolved immediately.

If I were you,
I'd write a letter to the Action Line at the Merc (actionline@mercurynews.com). This is the kind of thing they will print and put pressure on Comcast. It's unacceptable for someone at comcast to physically disconnect service (for no reason), which includes phone (E911), and then say you need to wait at least 24 hours for repairs (Reconnecting your service).

Considering this knocks out home phone service, which means no E911 for 24 hours, I do not find this is acceptable in the least. Sure many have cell phones, but what if your home has an intruder in the middle of the night? I know for me, first instinct is to grab that home phone and dial 911.

But with your situation, that can't happen. Could be a life or death kind of thing. I agree with another poster that you should demand a credit and give this example as to why it is vital to have these problems (Especially digital voice) resolved immediately.

If I were you,
I'd write a letter to the Action Line at the Merc (actionline@mercurynews.com). This is the kind of thing they will print and put pressure on Comcast. It's unacceptable for someone at comcast to physically disconnect service (for no reason), which includes phone (E911), and then say you need to wait at least 24 hours for repairs (Reconnecting your service).

File a complaint with the FCC as per my previous post.

AT&T/SBC is likely going to make you wait until the next day to fix a problem with your home line also...it's just their service is so much more mature that it's much rarer to have an outage on their phone service (you can always switch back...people leaving them is about the only thing that motivates them ($$'s talk)

For those of you doing 1394 recording with these boxes, and have a PS3, you'll be happy to know the latest PS3 update as of yesterday (version 2.20) finally fixes the problems with longer recordings (over 2GB), they now play back flawlessly. You still have to change the container from MPEG2-TS to PS to get Dolby Digital sound... but that's pretty easy and quick (and no loss of quality) using ie. VLC.

AT&T/SBC is likely going to make you wait until the next day to fix a problem with your home line also...it's just their service is so much more mature that it's much rarer to have an outage on their phone service (you can always switch back...people leaving them is about the only thing that motivates them ($$'s talk)Next day? My home phone service went out a year or so ago (DSL was fine, though). When I called SBC (before changing their name to ATT, but after they were called PacBell), they set up a service call for about a week later. A WEEK!!!! I was shocked. Back in NY, they would come the same day.

Who can be without phone service for a week? WTF is wrong with these people? I'm sure if they could have fixed it remotely by using some guy in India, they would have. They, like all US corporations nowadays, don't want to spend a penny on labor costs. Yet, they have no problem giving their execs multi-million dollar bonuses. Assclowns.

This FCC seems to care about anything the cable guys are doing to hurt consumers (though they don't seem to care about what the Bell's are doing to hurt consumers :rolleyes:) . Certainly if they care so much about degrading **********, they should care about comcast degrading video.You mean DOESN'T seem to care, don't you? They've been in the pocket of the NAB and other corporate interests for the past seven and a half years. They care as much about the consumer as the Chinese gov't cares about product safety.

From today's merc:
http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/ci_8718530

Comcast says it plans to ease video and music complaints, will team with b_i_t_t_o_r_r_e_n_t
Plus: AMD offers slew of new chips; Cnet told to seek expertise; Sun bolstering Moscow operations
By Steve Johnson
Mercury News
Article Launched: 03/27/2008 01:51:15 PM PDT

Seeking more speed: Under fire for delaying delivery of Internet video and music, Comcast announced today that it will enlist San Francisco-based b_i_t_t_o_r_r_e_n_t to resolve such gripes.

The Philadelphia Internet service provider, which has been lambasted for hampering online file-sharing by its subscribers, said it will work with b_i_t_t_o_r_r_e_n_t to find better ways to transport large files over the Internet instead of delaying file transfers.

Consumer and "Net Neutrality" advocates have accused Comcast of stifling delivery of Internet video, an emerging competitor to the cable operators' core business. Comcast has said its practices were necessary to keep file-sharing traffic from overwhelming local cable lines, where neighbors share capacity with one another.

P.S. You can't say b_i_t_t_o_r_r_e_n_t here? Wow.

P.S. You can't say b_i_t_t_o_r_r_e_n_t here? Wow.

Haven't been able to for quite some time, I use Bit-Torrent when I need to use the name in a post, or BT.

Seeing as up to 70% of internet traffic is bitorent and that what... at least 60-70% of that is probably piracy... I don't mind them throttling heavy users at all if it means I can play my 15k/sec online video games without getting massive lag! ;)

Getting really sick of the ADS quality here in Sunnyvale (94089). Watching the Sharks game (FSNBA, ch40) right now, and the PQ just flat out sucks. Even the screen overlays (score, time) have tons of artifacts. Can't even read the sponsor logos (not just the ones along the boards on the rink, I'm talking about the ones on the screen overlay), much less see who actually has the puck at any given moment.

I'll see if I can get a decent photo of it in the second period...

Getting really sick of the ADS quality here in Sunnyvale (94089). Watching the Sharks game (FSNBA, ch40) right now, and the PQ just flat out sucks. Even the screen overlays (score, time) have tons of artifacts. Can't even read the sponsor logos (not just the ones along the boards on the rink, I'm talking about the ones on the screen overlay), much less see who actually has the puck at any given moment.

I'll see if I can get a decent photo of it in the second period...

Here are some shots of the Comcastic bitrate FSN is being carried at on ADS in 94089. Taken from a tripod in a completely dark room on a 42" LCD rear projection at 9 feet (pure optical zoom, not digital, to fit the 4:3 image frame). Original image resolution was 2272x1520.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll18/sinewave16/DSC00500.jpg


http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll18/sinewave16/DSC00502.jpg




This power play is sponsored by... ? (No points given if you're a regular Sharks viewer) Might be interesting to see how the sponsor's marketing department feels about their sponsorship dollars being spent on something that's hard to see due to compression artifacts...

Can you guess which player has the puck? Answer: the guy (*cough* pixels) behind the net...

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll18/sinewave16/DSC00508.jpg


Just in case you're thinking, "yeah, but hockey is a fast moving sport, and it's hard for MPEG2 to keep up at even moderate bitrates..." -- this is after play has stopped, and the players are just coasting through center ice (this is a stationary shot!!!). Wanna take a guess as to which company's logo is on the ice, top-left? If you didn't know beforehand, it might be hard to tell...
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll18/sinewave16/DSC00515.jpg


http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll18/sinewave16/DSC00517.jpg

And to think... Sharks games used to look really good (in comparison) back when they were analog...

If you think Sharks games are bad, try watching a Warrior game on TNT on analog channel 37 from San Lorenzo. It was painful watching this broadcast knowing that TNT offers a nice, crisp HD version that Comcast has yet to launch in this area. The NBA play-offs are coming up and I was really hoping we'd be upgraded by now. It really sucks to be at the bottom of Comcast's priorities...

If you think Sharks games are bad, try watching a Warrior game on TNT on analog channel 37 from San Lorenzo. It was painful watching this broadcast knowing that TNT offers a nice, crisp HD version that Comcast has yet to launch in this area. The NBA play-offs are coming up and I was really hoping we'd be upgraded by now. It really sucks to be at the bottom of Comcast's priorities...

Has your analog always looked bad? I know some folks have crappy analog (snow on some channels, etc.), but honestly, I never had any problems with my analog PQ before we went ADS. The reason I'm pissed off is that my basic/expanded-basic PQ has gone down significantly since ADS was turned on and I'm in an upgraded 1GHz area!!! No excuses for cutting corners on bandwidth guys!!! If there isn't enough bandwidth to provide a decent digital stream, why bother with digital simulcast? Just stick with the analog...

HD channels updated! This is in Sunnyvale, 94087, Fremont @ Hollenbeck. Now we have HGTV, Discovery, MHD again (we moved from Mountain View, which had the updated lineup a year ago).

For those of you living in Fremont and using a QAM tuner here are the digital numbers that I got last week

I left out a few channels that only show commercials it seems plus some foreign channels as well as local Fremont government (does anyone watch these?) plus some educational college channels. A bunch of channels just seem to selling stuff all the time, so I left them out to...

High Definition
CBS : 111-1
FOX : 111-2
NBC : 116-1
ABC : 117-1
KQED-HD : 117-2
CW (44) : 95-2
A36 : 85-1

Non-HD Digital (I won't relist what is above that also broadcasts in non-HD)
KCSM : 108-4
KQED-Encore : 117-3
KQED-World : 108-8
KQED-Kids : 108-10
Discovery : 84-3
CSPAN3 : 79-8
WGN : 79-4
KTVN : 85-3
KRON-4 : 110-8
FIT-TV : 80-2
TV50 : 96-1
LATV (Spanish/English?) : 111-3
ABC-7 (local) : 117-7
ABC Accuweather : 117-8
Movieplex : 89-13
Arts (plus Chinese) : 108-2

The allocations seem to change quite frequently and some come and go on digital, like Discovery.

enjoy

Peter

Hi there,

I'm new to the forum and registered because last week I seemed to have lost NBC's HD channel for Fremont. On my TV (Sony bravia), the channel was 116.1. Now I'm getting "unauthorized" message on my tv when I try to load it.

Anyone know what the new channel # is? Or was it completely removed? Also how come my channel numbers don't quite match Peter's here even though we're both comcast users? BTW, I don't use a digital box for my TV if that makes any difference?

I thought the game looked good PQ wise. especially given it was just in SD.

why it wasnt in HD is a major annoyance given that it was in SJ and they have
HD cameras...

(santa clara 95051/comcast 3416 dvr/42" dlp tv/upgraded neighborhood/no freaking blast on internet though/)

And to think... Sharks games used to look really good (in comparison) back when they were analog...

Was ADS turned on recently for you? Local Comcast might still be going through adjustments. You should complain. How is CNN?

If it is any source of hope, for me (95134) and many others, ADS digital channel quality pretty good.

Getting really sick of the ADS quality here in Sunnyvale (94089). Watching the Sharks game (FSNBA, ch40) right now, and the PQ just flat out sucks. Even the screen overlays (score, time) have tons of artifacts. Can't even read the sponsor logos (not just the ones along the boards on the rink, I'm talking about the ones on the screen overlay), much less see who actually has the puck at any given moment.

I'll see if I can get a decent photo of it in the second period...

Last nite I discovered here in San Jose that KNTV was changed to 79.3 from 79.1 and KBCW went to 79.1 from 91.2. Almost missed recording Smallville on my sony dvr.
On my Phillips plasma KNTV still shows at 11.1 and KBCW now shows at 44.1.

I thought the game looked good PQ wise. especially given it was just in SD.

why it wasnt in HD is a major annoyance given that it was in SJ and they have
HD cameras...

(santa clara 95051/comcast 3416 dvr/42" dlp tv/upgraded neighborhood/no freaking blast on internet though/)


Could be that your area is getting a higher bitrate for FSN (and perhaps other expanded basic channels)...

Would have been nice to have it in HD, for sure (no complaints about HD PQ here, those games look nothing short of fantastic!!)

Was ADS turned on recently for you? Local Comcast might still be going through adjustments. You should complain. How is CNN?

If it is any source of hope, for me (95134) and many others, ADS digital channel quality pretty good.

I don't recall the exact timeframe ADS was turned on here (upgrade happened 11/07), but I think it was sometime in late Jan, early Feb. Hopefully you're right about my local area going through adjustments (I know upgrades are underway in other parts of Sunnyvale, though I don't think this should be affecting my loop, should it?).

CNN looks... somewhat ok. There's some noticeable artifacting (i.e. analog looked better). To give a general idea of the overall PQ on ADS channels -- you know at the end of some commercials, there's about half a screen of fine print? It's completely unreadable, as in maybe I can make out a word or two. I'm young, and I have good eyes, and I've always been able to make out the text. The amount of compression in use is just too much to allow a sufficient/acceptable level of detail.

Any suggestions as to how I should complain to Comcast? I mean, I doubt this is something a regular CSR can help me with... supervisor? I was hoping that these posts would be a good way to bring the issue to light. :D

I'm new to the forum and registered because last week I seemed to have lost NBC's HD channel for Fremont. On my TV (Sony bravia), the channel was 116.1. Now I'm getting "unauthorized" message on my tv when I try to load it.

Anyone know what the new channel # is? Or was it completely removed? Also how come my channel numbers don't quite match Peter's here even though we're both comcast users? BTW, I don't use a digital box for my TV if that makes any difference?
Most likely it says unauthorized because NBC was moved (in your area) from 116 to somewhere else. The replacement is likely encrypted.

The reason your channel #s don't match is because potentially every head-end can have different channel locations. In many cases there are similarities, but you almost never see every single channel in the same location unless you are on the same head-end.

Rescan for new channels, then step through every one until you find NBC.

digital versions look better than analog here, especially the 704x480 ones (some are less, I think 512x480 on some channels...)

the warriors game was on TNT last night.. in High Def. Looked great.. maybe you should upgrade to HD ;)

Getting really sick of the ADS quality here in Sunnyvale (94089). Watching the Sharks game (FSNBA, ch40) right now, and the PQ just flat out sucks. Even the screen overlays (score, time) have tons of artifacts. Can't even read the sponsor logos (not just the ones along the boards on the rink, I'm talking about the ones on the screen overlay), much less see who actually has the puck at any given moment.

I'll see if I can get a decent photo of it in the second period...

Thank god tomorrow's road game vs. defending Cup Champ Ducks, where the Sharks have a chance to clinch the Pacific Division Title and the 2 seed in the Western Conference Playoffs, is one of the few road games in HD. :D

digital versions look better than analog here...I would have to agree, for my area too. They do not look as good as ATSC OTA signals, obviously. But, they do away with the snow and grain of the analog cable signals, at roughly the same underlying PQ otherwise. I've been happy with ADS.

OT but: .. at least the 2 seed in the west, they could still pass detroit for #1 if the stars
align properly....

Thank god tomorrow's road game vs. defending Cup Champ Ducks, where the Sharks have a chance to clinch the Pacific Division Title and the 2 seed in the Western Conference Playoffs, is one of the few road games in HD. :D

My area already has pretty good analog without lots of snow or scrolling lines. I've seen areas that have much worse analog.

IMO ADS gets rid of analog artifacts like snow and lines so many people will feel the PQ is much better. However it does introduce mpg artifacts like macroblocking and mosquito noise so others that are more sensitive to those think the PQ is worse, especially if their analog was pretty good to start with.

For me ADS is acceptable (and so was analog). Mostly it is trading off one type of artifact for another, with individual sensitivities to the different artifacts varying.

Yes, most of us are so accustomed to seeing NTSC snow that we tend to ignore it. But MPEG artifacts jump out to our eyes.

Having said that, I'm surprised to see "PQ" even mentioned in a discussion of SDTV reception. I thought that those of us who cared had stopped watching such stuff. ;)

sharks fanboyism trumps anti-SD fanboyism :)

and since no SCIFI-HD yet.....
granted its possible to grab the HD version of SG-Atlantis off the net before
it even airs out here in SD I still end up watching it "live" most of the time


Having said that, I'm surprised to see "PQ" even mentioned in a discussion of SDTV reception. I thought that those of us who cared had stopped watching such stuff. ;)

Who else has encountered these problems in the last week or two?
I began having problems almost 2 weeks ago.
I was unable to see HBO, ESPN & ESPN 2 were out, channels 36-42 were out
and so were channels 3-6 and channel 505(Sundance) was out as well.
When I say out, the screen would read, "one moment please" and was all dark.

Eventually a Comcast tech came to visit and his solution was to replace my
HD Box w/Dvr with a new one.

5 nites later and most of the problems have been solved.
My ESPN or ESPN 2 will still have major tiling issues and audio drop outs.
This morning while watching channel 2, more audio drops out were occuring.

Wondering if anybody else is having similiar trouble in the area

Thank god tomorrow's road game vs. defending Cup Champ Ducks, where the Sharks have a chance to clinch the Pacific Division Title and the 2 seed in the Western Conference Playoffs, is one of the few road games in HD. :D

I'm in 94611 and I'm not seeing it on 720 - the feed on 40 is there and working, though. Is anyone seeing this game on FSNHD?

not in 95051 yet no.
:(

I'm in 94611 and I'm not seeing it on 720 - the feed on 40 is there and working, though. Is anyone seeing this game on FSNHD?

and there was much rejoicing as it came on finally...

not in 95051 yet no.
:(

and there was much rejoicing as it came on finally...

Yes! I'm a season ticket holder, so road HD games are a precious commodity :P

My area already has pretty good analog without lots of snow or scrolling lines. I've seen areas that have much worse analog.

IMO ADS gets rid of analog artifacts like snow and lines so many people will feel the PQ is much better. However it does introduce mpg artifacts like macroblocking and mosquito noise so others that are more sensitive to those think the PQ is worse, especially if their analog was pretty good to start with.

For me ADS is acceptable (and so was analog). Mostly it is trading off one type of artifact for another, with individual sensitivities to the different artifacts varying.

Yeah, if your analog was crap to start with, I can understand the welcoming of ADS. My analog was great to start with, hence my complaint.

Yes, most of us are so accustomed to seeing NTSC snow that we tend to ignore it. But MPEG artifacts jump out to our eyes.

Having said that, I'm surprised to see "PQ" even mentioned in a discussion of SDTV reception. I thought that those of us who cared had stopped watching such stuff. ;)

Hey, if every game was in HD, I wouldn't have said a thing. But the reality is that my PQ has gone down significantly, which just isn't acceptable to me. I can only imagine if I still had my 6200-series box, on which digital was truly unwatchable. When I switched to a cable card, my digital PQ went through the roof. I remember when I got my cable card, I was actually excited when games were on FSN+, because it actually looked better than the analog FSN -- back then, digital bitrates were good (even on a 550MHz system!), but no longer...

Last nite I discovered here in San Jose that KNTV was changed to 79.3 from 79.1 and KBCW went to 79.1 from 91.2. Almost missed recording Smallville on my sony dvr.
On my Phillips plasma KNTV still shows at 11.1 and KBCW now shows at 44.1.


2 nites ago I also lost my signal for KNTV.
Channel 3 was SD and Channel 11 was HD.

Does anybody know where the channel moved
for the Peninsula area???

2 nites ago I also lost my signal for KNTV.
Channel 3 was SD and Channel 11 was HD.

Does anybody know where the channel moved
for the Peninsula area???
Mine is at 92 sharing bandwidth with KBCW. Yours could be anywhere.

Hey, if every game was in HD, I wouldn't have said a thing. But the reality is that my PQ has gone down significantly, which just isn't acceptable to me.
I watched the Sharks on analog 40 and ADS 40 tonight and they both looked very bad. I'm wondering if there is something wrong with the source feed.

Yeah guys, it's all right here.......

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1008271
The original poster was complaining about ADS picture quality. That post is not relevant for ADS picture quality.

Having said that, I'm surprised to see "PQ" even mentioned in a discussion of SDTV reception. I thought that those of us who cared had stopped watching such stuff. ;)Apparently, you have never watched digital OTA SD broadcasts. Compared to analog OTA, satellite digital, and cable analog and digital SD signals, digital OTA looks practically like HD. After so many years of looking at crap, one forgets what a proper SD signal is supposed to look like.

Gimme a break! OTA SD is getting better (so I no longer routinely have to switch to the analog station to keep from cringing at the MPEG artifacts, as was the case 5 years ago when I first started watching DTV*) but "practically like HD"...? No, it ain't.


*Ed.: Oops! Make that 6 years ago--see my "join date" at left--how time flies for us old folks. :(

Comcast HD PQ degradation.... (I thought this was pertinent for all of us......)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1008271

Gimme a break! OTA SD is getting better (so I no longer routinely have to switch to the analog station to keep from cringing at the MPEG artifacts, as was the case 5 years ago when I first started watching DTV*) but "practically like HD"...? No, it ain't.You'll need to look up the words "compared to" in the dictionary, as well as learn to read an entire sentence before commenting on it.

OTOH, it could just be that old age kicking in. ;)

On comcast's cable system, without a cable box, what can be received with a new HDTV with a QAM, NTSC and ATSC tuner? I'm guessing:
- all HD content that's in the clear, e.g. 702, 703, 704, 705,... 709 at least
- 2-82

I subscribe to the digital tier, but do I need a comcast box to get the other channels I've not listed above?

Thanks for your patience.
jeff

Comcast HD PQ degradation.... (I thought this was pertinent for all of us......)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1008271
Yes that is pertinent to many of us, but it was already discussed at length a few pages back. The sequencing of your initial post made it seem like it was responding to the complaint about ADS, which it is not relevant for.

You'll need to look up the words "compared to" in the dictionary, as well as learn to read an entire sentence before commenting on it.

OTOH, it could just be that old age kicking in. ;)It probably is. "Practically" used to mean something too "back in the day", instead of just being a noise made by beating gums.

Yes you need a box or cablecard to tune in the encrypted QAM channels, which is anything except the HD locals and the ADS versions of the "basic" cable channels.

On comcast's cable system, without a cable box, what can be received with a new HDTV with a QAM, NTSC and ATSC tuner? I'm guessing:
- all HD content that's in the clear, e.g. 702, 703, 704, 705,... 709 at least
- 2-82

I subscribe to the digital tier, but do I need a comcast box to get the other channels I've not listed above?
You can get the HD locals but they won't have the same channel #s as you've listed. They will either be the OTA number like 2.x, 5.x or some number you aren't used to like 117.x.

You can get limited+expanded basic 2-82 in analog.

You can get limited basic 2-30 in digital SD (ADS) but they won't be numbered correctly.

For the most part, everything else you will need a cable box or CableCARD. There are some minor channels that are sometimes left unencrypted, but those are not something you can depend on.

and sometimes you'll get your neighbor's pay-per-view which can be.... interesting to say the least...

Yes that is pertinent to many of us, but it was already discussed at length a few pages back. The sequencing of your initial post made it seem like it was responding to the complaint about ADS, which it is not relevant for.

I don't always scan every single post, so that apparently was my error. And if I'm bringing up old news, then I apologize, but I certainly wouldn't be the first. I wouldn't want to miss that linked thread, although I'm sure many of us are also subscribed to it. I was just trying to pass on what I thought was crucial info. I think most of the folks here are smart enough to know whether it was relevant to them or not.
Please don't lynch me! :rolleyes:

I'm gonna assume those screenshots are legit, and the guy didn't intentionally try to make comcast look bad... because it would be real easy to take screenshots that are 1 frame off, which can make a huge difference with transitions. 1 frame that looks like that after edits/transitions really isn't that bad either. If it looks like that all the time, well that's another story...

bfdtv is legit.

If you want to look at 3-pak HD channels in action, try HGTV, AETV, and SHO. Those changed to 3-pak after the recent channel re-org in my area. Probably for your area also.

It probably is. "Practically" used to mean something too "back in the day", instead of just being a noise made by beating gums.Nope. I still have my teeth.

Again, it seems old age may be an issue. :D

bfdtv is legit.

If you want to look at 3-pak HD channels in action, try HGTV, AETV, and SHO. Those changed to 3-pak after the recent channel re-org in my area. Probably for your area also.They are certainly making DirecTV more and more desirable. (The new batch of D* commercials with the guys from the Christopher Guest movies making fun of cable seem to have come at just the right time.)

They are certainly making DirecTV more and more desirable. (The new batch of D* commercials with the guys from the Christopher Guest movies making fun of cable seem to have come at just the right time.)

Almost prescient in fact.

I just signed up for the $25/month promotion for Digital Starter + HBO and received my first bill today. I was installed with a cablecard to a Tivo and a standard STB. It looks like they took the liberty of adding the $7 HD fee to my monthly charges. I was under the impression that the charge was only to lease HD equipment. Has this policy changed, or should I be calling Comcast to get the HD charge removed? Appreciate any info, thanks!

DirectTV has a temporary HD lead. However next year with Docsis3, and SDV it will all change. Why would you want to pay for 100's of channels. When you can get access to just the stuff you want. IE downloading movies via Netflix or Apple. Downloading tv shows directly from the provider.

Comcast will be providing 160mbs next year thats a lot of bandwidth for streaming/downloading. If you translate your DTV dollars thats a lot of shows and movies you could buy.

DTV cannot provide internet, you have to go to ATT, Verizon, or Comcast to get it.

I just signed up for the $25/month promotion for Digital Starter + HBO and received my first bill today. I was installed with a cablecard to a Tivo and a standard STB. It looks like they took the liberty of adding the $7 HD fee to my monthly charges. I was under the impression that the charge was only to lease HD equipment. Has this policy changed, or should I be calling Comcast to get the HD charge removed? Appreciate any info, thanks!

If they're charging you $7 for the HD box, then you should call them and get that off. I also have a TiVo, and on top of my normal cable bill, I pay $1.79 a month for CCs. Otherwise, there should be no extra HD charge. Hope that helps!

I just signed up for the $25/month promotion for Digital Starter + HBO and received my first bill today. I was installed with a cablecard to a Tivo and a standard STB. It looks like they took the liberty of adding the $7 HD fee to my monthly charges. I was under the impression that the charge was only to lease HD equipment. Has this policy changed, or should I be calling Comcast to get the HD charge removed? Appreciate any info, thanks!

If you have an existing CC or a STB, they will charge you for the second outlet. Your TiVo is probably considered a second HD outlet.

DTV cannot provide internet, you have to go to ATT, Verizon, or Comcast to get it.So? I go to ATT now, as do many, if not most, hi-bandwidth users in the Bay area.

Also, I find comparing Comcast to D* in terms of value is an argument you don't want to undertake. D* may give you many channels you do not want or need. But, you can get them at a lower cost than Comcast's cheapest "Starter" package.

Cable does have two big advantages over DBS, though. The first is OnDemand. With current technology, it is hard for DBS to match even a tiny fraction of what cable can do with it. (Although, D* is at least making an effort.)

The second, of course, is installation. Most homes in the area are pre-wired for cable. And, no antenna(e) is necessary, so no worry about line of sight or homeowners associations.

But, when it comes down to value, DirecTV currently kicks Comcast's patootie. And, as I've said before, the main thing keeping me from switching is D*'s lack of TVJapan. I'd miss OnDemand. But, it isn't a deal breaker.

If you have an existing CC or a STB, they will charge you for the second outlet. Your TiVo is probably considered a second HD outlet.

If they're charging you $7 for the HD box, then you should call them and get that off. I also have a TiVo, and on top of my normal cable bill, I pay $1.79 a month for CCs. Otherwise, there should be no extra HD charge. Hope that helps!

Hmm, on my bill I see that the Digital Starter Package includes one STB. They are also charging me $6.99 for a "Digital Addl Outlet" and $7.00 for "High Definition TV". Hmm, no charge for a cable card though. It sounds like at minimum, I shouldn't be charged for the HD. Potentially, I should be charged $1.79 instead of $6.99 for the additional outlet?

If they're charging you $7 for the HD box, then you should call them and get that off. I also have a TiVo, and on top of my normal cable bill, I pay $1.79 a month for CCs. Otherwise, there should be no extra HD charge. Hope that helps!

If you have an existing CC or a STB, they will charge you for the second outlet. Your TiVo is probably considered a second HD outlet.

So, if I added an HD (non-DVR) box to the BR, I'd have to pay $7 HD Converter fee AND an Add'l Outlet fee? Or, only the $7 HD Converter fee?

What about a 2nd HD-DVR? Is it $13.95, plus outlet fee? Or, is it only outlet fee as HD-DVR service is listed as a "Service", not an equipment charge.)

Also, if they ever get this "Connected Home", or whatever they are calling Multi-Room Viewing, off the ground, will that enable the current non-DVR HD boxes to playback from current HD-DVR's located in another room? Or, will it require two newer DCH DVR's?

The last I spoke with Comcast you pay the outlet fee when you get any equipment from Comcast (STB, HD STB, CableCARD, PVR) They will never break it out this way but the outlet fee bundles an equipment fee and a digital mirror fee. You get one "free" outlet (fee) bundled in with any package.

There is then a surcharge fee for HD STB ($7), 2nd CableCARD in the same PVR ($1.79), and PVR ($13.95)

The surcharge fee for HD STB is $8 if you don't have a digital package.

Hmm, on my bill I see that the Digital Starter Package includes one STB. They are also charging me $6.99 for a "Digital Addl Outlet" and $7.00 for "High Definition TV". Hmm, no charge for a cable card though. It sounds like at minimum, I shouldn't be charged for the HD. Potentially, I should be charged $1.79 instead of $6.99 for the additional outlet?
If you don't have an HD STB, the $7 fee should not be there. It may take you a while to find a representative that agrees with that (or you might get one the first time you call)

If you don't need the STB, return it, and they should drop the $6.99 fee.

I know Comcast is supposed to add some channels in the middle of the month, but have they said anything about ESPNews HD in the Bay Area? (There's obviously a slot reserved... Either 723 or 726, since I'd assume they would group them together.)

fitprod

Has anyone else noticed that KPIX periodically loses sync with the decoder in the cable box? By "loses sync", I mean that after a commercial, generally, the image will freeze or all sound will be lost. This always happens after a switch from SD (a commercial or other teaser) back to the HD signal. Switching channels then back resyncs things.

This has been going on for a couple of weeks. I have only noticed the phenomenon with KPIX (channel 705).

I'm not sure if anyone answered this for you, but part of the audio drop out is related to the brief half second it takes to switch from DD 2.0 (Commercials) to DD 5.1 (Programs), I'm not sure about local shows, but this is a problem with CBS programing.

fitprod

OnDemand is more than made up for by better DVRs with more storage.

You just record stuff you want to watch.

Comcast's OnDemand product is already crippled PQ/AQ-wise anyhow isn't it?

If you don't have an HD STB, the $7 fee should not be there. It may take you a while to find a representative that agrees with that (or you might get one the first time you call)

If you don't need the STB, return it, and they should drop the $6.99 fee.

Thanks! That actually ended up being easy to fix. I used the online chat, and the the CSR took off the HD charge with no hassle at all.

An interesting article in the S.J. Mercury News today with an interview with Mr. Rick Germano, Senior Vice President, Customer Operations.

If he does what he says he's going to do ( and I mean all of it ), he's back on the Christmas list ;)

Seems he'll ( or his group will ) be in the Bay Area May 7th. Get your questions ready :p

Here's the link....http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_8747752

Laters,
Mikef5

Comcast's OnDemand product is already crippled PQ/AQ-wise anyhow isn't it?It's pretty good actually... good enough, at least for the free HD movies, don't know if I'd like paying $5.95 for them....

Of course that's only IF you can get a free stream. During prime time it's a total crapshoot if you can even get a movie to start without the dreaded "SRM20" error. :(

Thanks! That actually ended up being easy to fix. I used the online chat, and the the CSR took off the HD charge with no hassle at all.
Now you just need to verify on the next bill and decipher the prorations :)

It's pretty good actually... good enough, at least for the free HD movies, don't know if I'd like paying $5.95 for them....

Of course that's only IF you can get a free stream. During prime time it's a total crapshoot if you can even get a movie to start without the dreaded "SRM20" error. :(

I'm guessing that's a "busy" error? That's one of the things about Comcast, they have some great products, they just need to get away from providing them in a half-assed manner.

OnDemand really means whenever your neighbors are done watching what they're watching, then you'll get yours. Internet speeds are all over the map - that's one thing nice about DSL, same speed all day every day, and now their national HD channels have second class PQ.


Regarding the Gemano article, like Mikef5 says, actions speak much louder than words, especially when it comes to Comcast.

OnDemand is more than made up for by better DVRs with more storage.

You just record stuff you want to watch.Not really.

OnDemand is for watching stuff when there is nothing to watch on the regular channels. Plus, there's tons of stuff that isn't even on the regular channels at all. And, I always find stuff from the regular channels that I didn't even know about to record in the first place, and OnDemand gives me a second chance.

It's a great thing to have.

If he does what he says he's going to do ( and I mean all of it ), he's back on the Christmas list ;)Did he say when we're getting the new DCX cable boxes? These look sweet.
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/01/03/motorolas-new-lineup-of-mpeg4-hd-stbs/
http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail.jsp?globalObjectId=9066_8995_23&pageLocaleId=2026
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadgethd.com/media/2008/01/dcx3400.jpg

The last I spoke with Comcast you pay the outlet fee when you get any equipment from Comcast (STB, HD STB, CableCARD, PVR) They will never break it out this way but the outlet fee bundles an equipment fee and a digital mirror fee. You get one "free" outlet (fee) bundled in with any package.

There is then a surcharge fee for HD STB ($7), 2nd CableCARD in the same PVR ($1.79), and PVR ($13.95)

The surcharge fee for HD STB is $8 if you don't have a digital package.

Okay. So, if I have an HD-DVR already. And, I want to add an HD STB, I will be charged a $7 HD STB fee PLUS an add'l outlet fee? How much is the outlet fee?

I seem to remember something like $7.95? Is that still the case? If so, $14.95 is way too much. Seriously. They're out of their f-ing minds.

The Sat companies charge an add'l receiver fee of $5.99...period.

Please DirecTV...add TV Japan. Pleeeeeeeeeeease!

Did he say when we're getting the new DCX cable boxes? These look sweet.
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/01/03/motorolas-new-lineup-of-mpeg4-hd-stbs/
http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail.jsp?globalObjectId=9066_8995_23&pageLocaleId=2026
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadgethd.com/media/2008/01/dcx3400.jpg

Wow, these do look nice. Please anybody, let us hear when you get these.

Wow, these do look nice. Please anybody, let us hear when you get these.

From what I've read Comcast has not committed to using these yet. That begs the question: has anyone heard if Comcast is going to employ mpeg-4 for SDV? If so, I would assume this would be the box they use. What I really want to see though is Comcast get the necessary infrastructure to support the MoCA options to enable things such as multi-room viewing, music & picture sharing, etc.

From what I've read Comcast has not committed to using these yet. That begs the question: has anyone heard if Comcast is going to employ mpeg-4 for SDV? If so, I would assume this would be the box they use. What I really want to see though is Comcast get the necessary infrastructure to support the MoCA options to enable things such as multi-room viewing, music & picture sharing, etc.


I don't think they will. SDV works fine on EXISTING cable boxes. If it needed a lot of new boxes, it wouldn't be the solution that TW and others have found it to be. It should work fine on any box that can handle ondemand.

Because it works on existing boxes, it must be mpeg2.

MPEG4 may eventually get deployed, but it will require new boxes, and simulcasting, just like ADS works today for digital only boxes that can't receive analog.

I find it amusing that folks here think DBS only has a temporary advntage. Yes, Cable has a ton of advantages. But Comcast and many MSO's have failed to exploit them. They could have offered 16 Mbps service 4 years ago, but didn't. They could have deployed SDV 2 years ago, but didn't. They could have turned off a bunch of analog stations 5 years ago, but didn't.

Now DirecTV and FIOS is handing them their head, but this was seen by many people years ago, and still Comcast did nothing. Except raise rates of course. And deploy telephone service. Great - I already have phone service, but they let their core product be uncompetitive. Moto boxes? What crap.... Even the DirecTV boxes look fantastic compared with the trash Comcast deploys here.

Cable should have wiped the floor with the Bells and the DBS guys, but they sat on their fannies and got creamed. Now that they find themselves in hot water, do we see bold action to leap ahead? Nope, an analog channel here, overcompression there, a new HD channel every few months.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO CUT IT! Come on Comcast, stop making half-assed moves and expecting that to fix your problem. Act boldly or you are going to really be in a world of hurt.

Did he say when we're getting the new DCX cable boxes? These look sweet.
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/01/03/motorolas-new-lineup-of-mpeg4-hd-stbs/
http://www.motorola.com/mediacenter/news/detail.jsp?globalObjectId=9066_8995_23&pageLocaleId=2026
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadgethd.com/media/2008/01/dcx3400.jpg


Yeah, well.......looks are one thing, but will this be another DVR box released before the bugs are worked out? How long have we been suffering with delayed remote commands, lousy picture (with no HD pass through), and random resets? Another box from Mot does not give me encouragement.

As Direct is learning, a fancy looking box is not enough.

-Dave

I know Comcast is supposed to add some channels in the middle of the month

I still haven't seen any notice on my STB about the new channels. Hopefully everything is still on schedule to deliver us these new channels on Apr 15th.

Yeah, well.......looks are one thing, but will this be another DVR box released before the bugs are worked out? How long have we been suffering with delayed remote commands, lousy picture (with no HD pass through), and random resets? Another box from Mot does not give me encouragement.

As Direct is learning, a fancy looking box is not enough.

-Dave

LOL...it's SOP for Motorola to release STBs with bugs, if it didn't have any, it wouldn't be worthy of the Motorola name. :D

Yeah, well.......looks are one thing, but will this be another DVR box released before the bugs are worked out? How long have we been suffering with delayed remote commands, lousy picture (with no HD pass through), and random resets? Another box from Mot does not give me encouragement.

As Direct is learning, a fancy looking box is not enough.
-Dave

None of the boxes can compete against the Dish Network DVR. It has two satellite receivers plus an excellent OTA receiver and you can record programming from all three recievers simultaneously while playing back two shows you've already recorded to two different TVs, one HD, one SD. Try to do that on any other box!

Not only does it have lots of nice features, but it's reliable and you get all of the recordings you request. The box doesn't reboot all the time. It produces a great picture, has skip forward and back buttons, pause, slow motion, a great program guide and it's easy to use. I couldn't be more pleased with it.

Larry
SF

Here's the link....http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_8747752

Laters,
Mikef5

Thanks for the link, I may be using that "contact" form pretty quickly as my service has suddenly gone downhill to the point where I am seriously considering canceling.

The one thing that frustrates me to no end is the lack of respect for what I know and understand. It shouldn't be so shocking that I understand how CableCARDs, etc. work, I am an informed customer.

I am also not impressed with the "oh well" type of attitude for the issues I am having with my phone service, which is the only phone service I have in my house, something the Bells never took lightly. The one time I had problems with my last POTS phone, it was due to a storm and they were working around the clock to get it fixed. Now my phone goes out whenever it wants and no one seems to care...

Okay. So, if I have an HD-DVR already. And, I want to add an HD STB, I will be charged a $7 HD STB fee PLUS an add'l outlet fee? How much is the outlet fee?

I seem to remember something like $7.95? Is that still the case? If so, $14.95 is way too much. Seriously. They're out of their f-ing minds.

The Sat companies charge an add'l receiver fee of $5.99...period.

Please DirecTV...add TV Japan. Pleeeeeeeeeeease!

Yes, it's (addl outlet fee) + (HD fee). seems like they go up all the time now but last I checked they were $6.95 addl outlet and $7 hdtv, so $13.95 for an additional HD (non dvr) box.

the "good" news? is that if you call and ask nicely you can often get them to give you free things like the addl outlet fee.

Last year when they were offering "free dct" I got them to drop the addl outlet fee for a year, but I think that's up in April so I'll have to seriously consider if watching HD on the 23" bedroom LCD is worth $14/mo....

I'm guessing that's a "busy" error? That's one of the things about Comcast, they have some great products, they just need to get away from providing them in a half-assed manner.

OnDemand really means whenever your neighbors are done watching what they're watching, then you'll get yours. Internet speeds are all over the map - that's one thing nice about DSL, same speed all day every day, and now their national HD channels have second class PQ. yes SRM-20 is "no free streams" error or basically "the tubes are full".

dsl has it's own set of problems, namely the "CO" problem. must be nice to get 6mbits if you live next door to the "CO" but if you don't... the best I can get here in the office (no cable) is 1.1mb (384k up).

oh it's also $60/mo

Yeah, well.......looks are one thing, but will this be another DVR box released before the bugs are worked out? How long have we been suffering with delayed remote commands, lousy picture (with no HD pass through), and random resets? Another box from Mot does not give me encouragement.

As Direct is learning, a fancy looking box is not enough.

-DaveBy "looks", I meant that the published specs and features looked sweet. Physically, it looks ok, I guess. I kinda like the way the DCH looks now, actually. Although, I'd prefer all black to match the rest of my stuff.

Yes, it's (addl outlet fee) + (HD fee). seems like they go up all the time now but last I checked they were $6.95 addl outlet and $7 hdtv, so $13.95 for an additional HD (non dvr) box.

the "good" news? is that if you call and ask nicely you can often get them to give you free things like the addl outlet fee.

Last year when they were offering "free dct" I got them to drop the addl outlet fee for a year, but I think that's up in April so I'll have to seriously consider if watching HD on the 23" bedroom LCD is worth $14/mo....So, an HD DVR for the BR will cost an add'l $20.90/mo??? Sweet Chocolate Jesus! They must have some outstanding drugs in Philadelphia.

yes SRM-20 is "no free streams" error or basically "the tubes are full".

dsl has it's own set of problems, namely the "CO" problem. must be nice to get 6mbits if you live next door to the "CO" but if you don't... the best I can get here in the office (no cable) is 1.1mb (384k up).

oh it's also $60/moReally? ATT DSL advertises $35/mo for "Elite" (6mb/768kb). I only pay $25/mo for 3mb/512kb, currently.

I'm thinking of upgrading to Elite, which is available at my address, as opposed to switching to Comcast HSI for three main reasons:
- We can keep our email addresses.
- No blockage on P2P or streaming media. (With two Slingboxes, one incoming, one outgoing, I can't chance it.)
- Price

oh yes. they advertise it.

they also bother me on the phone every couple of months to beg me to "upgrade"

unfortunately the "CO" is in africa or something because we only get a max of 1.1mbits no matter what "service" they have us on - believe me I have tried.

like I said, dsl has its own set of problems....

$35 is for "home" service, if it's for a business address it's $55 or so.

oh yes. they advertise it.

they also bother me on the phone every couple of months to beg me to "upgrade"

unfortunately the "CO" is in africa or something because we only get a max of 1.1mbits no matter what "service" they have us on - believe me I have tried.

like I said, dsl has its own set of problems....

$35 is for "home" service, if it's for a business address it's $55 or so.Ahh. Business. Of course. But, Comcast doesn't charge more for business customers than residential? That's odd. Dish, DirecTV, and ATT all do.

Well, I've never experienced any set of problems with DSL, other than distance dictating speed. I've had it for about 6 years or so now. Smooth as silk.

My actual speeds are about what can be expected for the advertised speed: 2.5/425 vs 3/512. I would expect similar comparative performance for their Elite service.

So, an HD DVR for the BR will cost an add'l $20.90/mo??? Sweet Chocolate Jesus! They must have some outstanding drugs in Philadelphia.

Wow, that does seem high. In this case, if you get a TivoHD as a second DVR, you pay $6.95 add outlet, $1.79 dual cable card, plus whatever Tivo monthly charges:
a) If you get monthly with 1 year commit, it's $12.95/month for Tivo, or $21.69 total including the add outlet and cable card charges.
b) If you already have a Tivo, you can put the second Tivo on MSD discount at $6.95/month, and $15.96 total.
c) If you don't get MSD, but you can afford to go with a pre-pay, the cheapest 3 year pre-pay will be about $8.31/month, so $17.05 total.

So in the worst case, you can get Tivo HD for just ~70 cents more a month. And in many cases, you can get it cheaper than Comcast's HD DVR.