It's so hard to decide and I've been obsessive lately trying to figure out whether to stay or go
Why I'm not so happy with Comcast:
1)SD channels have absolutely terrible PQ, really hard to watch for the most part
2)Price is pretty high (currently right around $100/mo.)
3)HD channels are great but seem to have deteriorated a bit in PQ within the last six months (maybe it's just me)
4)Equipment is not so hot (DCT 3412 - major delay in remote to STB quite frequently)

I'm looking at D* mainly for improvements in SD channel PQ (I watch a lot of Fox Soccer Channel, BBC America and a few others. There's a lot of stuff I would watch but choose not to just because it's so bad right now with Comcast). With the package I've been creating the monthly price could come in at about $30 less per month than with Comcast so that's a good thing but that's without an HD-DVR because I don't want to pay the startup costs associated with that.
So some questions that might help me decide:
1)Is D*'s SD quality really a lot better than what I'm viewing now?
2)Is D*'s HD quality really that much worse than Comcast that I'll be really disappointed?
3)If I choose to upgrade to the HD-DVR later with D* am I going to hammered financially since I won't be a new customer anymore?
4)Is there hope that D* will drastically improve in HD PQ with this new satellite launching?
5)Does the D* HD receiver have digital coax output or just optical for audio?


Hopefully that's enough info and my concerns are spelled out. Bottom line, I want much better SD stuff without compromising the HD content. If the HD looks a little worse, a little softer I can deal with it and I don't think the HD channel lineups really affect me, I would actually really like to check out some HDNet stuff, I think all I'd really lose is MOJO/INHD (which I never watch) and MHD (also, never watch).

Thanks for your help in advance.

1) Depends on the channel
2) All their current 1080i channels are downrezzed to save bandwidth where in most cases cable systems don't need to do the same thing.
3) Depends on how long you wait and if you get lucky with the CSR you are dealing with.
4) Yes
5) Most are just optical, I believe the new HD DVR has both though.

Another thing you need to keep is mind is if Directv carries your locals in HD, if they don't, you'll need an OTA antenna to get them as long as you are in range of your local broadcast towers.

If you've got Comcast DIGITAL cable, don't be surprised if Direct's SD looks noticably WORSE.

1) 1)SD channels have absolutely terrible PQ, really hard to watch for the most partWith Comcast, make sure you are not using the scaler in the Motorola DCT34xx, as it does a horrible job. Turn the box off, press menu, and make sure you have 4:3 override enabled and set to 480i.

1)Is D*'s SD quality really a lot better than what I'm viewing now?There are reasons to switch to DirecTV -- Sunday Ticket, a better DVR -- but picture quality is not among them. As the above poster says, DirecTV SD looks significantly worse than the digital SD on most Comcast systems. Some people are led by DirecTV's marketing campaign to believe that they will get a better picture than cable, when the opposite is true in most circumstances. In years past, the analog channels on Comcast could be rather horrific, depending on the signal quality at your location, but for the most part, that is no longer the case, as Comcast has replaced its analog channels with digital simulcast (provided you use the STB/DVR).

Dish Network and DirecTV both downconvert their SD from 640x480 and 704x480 to 480x480. They degrade their channels in this way as it allows them to put more channels on their systems, i.e. quality is traded for quantity. Most cable providers -- Comcast included -- do the same thing, but not to the same extent. Comcast downconverts their digital channels from 640x480 to 528x480 or 544x480 (depending on the system), but that's still better than the 480x480 available on satellite. The fact that Comcast provides its SD channels with almost 40% more bandwidth, on average, helps too.

Of course, Dish Network and DirecTV also downconvert their HDTV from 1920x1080 to 1280x1080 (on a few channels, Dish Network uses 1440x1080). Both filter out high-frequency picture information (shadow detail) from the picture signal. This allows them to apply significant new compression to their signals. One obvious result of this excess compression is artifacting, commonly seen during movement.

Take the channel HDnet as an example. On Verizon FiOS, Hdnet is 1920x1080 @ 18Mbps; on DirecTV, that channel is 1280x1080 @ <12Mbps. The FiOS feed exhibits substantial shadow detail with a 3D "pop," with virtually no artifacting of any kind, even during movement -- much of the content is comparable in quality to Nine Inch Nails: Beside You In Time on Blu-ray. In contrast, the DirecTV feed exhibits substantially less shadow detail (no 3D "pop"), with pixelization and macroblocking during movement --- which no one would mistake for that Blu-ray disk. The Comcast high-definition picture quality is comparable to FiOS in most markets.

4)Equipment is not so hot (DCT 3412 - major delay in remote to STB quite frequently)No argument there. That said, have you seen the pictures of the Tivo software upgrade (http://www.tivolovers.com/Photos/CES2007/) coming to Comcast DVRs for an added monthly fee? Some discussion on it can be found in this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=682350).

You didn't state the make/model of your display, but the following may also shed some light on the issue:
On your old 27" CRT TV, SD (480i) content was displayed as 480i on the screen. Modern HDTVs have fixed panel resolution of 1280x720 or 1920x1080. Because of that, the 528x480 (480x480 in the case of DirecTV/Dish) image must be "zoomed" or "scaled" to to fit the higher resolution. Perhaps at some point you've taken a photo or graphic and resized it to 8-10x its normal size? Your display has to do the same thing.

The video processor in the TV performs this function and not all do it equally well. Some video processors, like those found in the newest Pioneer and NEC plasmas, do this reasonably well. Other video processors, like those found in cheaper LCDs, do a horrific job.

NTSC SD was never meant for viewing at larger sizes, so the larger you go, the worse SD will look. In contrast, high-definition was designed for larger screens; as you go larger, the high-definition picture looks better and better. Local channels like ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC, as well as cable channels like Comcast Sportsnet and Fox Sportsnet, ESPN, ESPN2, TNT, FOOD, MTV, Discovery, Wealth, NGC, HBO, Cinemax, Starz, Showtime, and TMC are already offered in HDTV, with others like CNN, History, SciFi, and the Weather Channel expected to follow later this year.At the moment, there are only two independent suppliers of video processors that deliver high quality for both SD and HD -- Silicon Optix (ReonVX, Realta) and Gennum (VXP). IMO, they are the Nvidia and ATI of the video processor market. A CE manufacturer like Samsung, Sony, or Toshiba can't create a comparable solution to the Silicon Optix Realta (>100 million transistors) any more than they can re-create the latest graphics chip from ATI or Nvidia. Unfortunately, the bulk of the market still consists of low-end, low-performance solutions, just as most PCs use integrated graphics.

In terms of part cost, the video processors in most $2000-$3000 TVs cost $8 to $15 in quantity. The Silicon Optix ReonVX costs $15-$20 depending on quantity, while the Realta costs $25-$40 depending on quantity. However, the real difference in cost is not the part, but rather the implementation -- most display vendors have extensive experience with cheap, low-quality solutions from Genesis (i.e. Faroudja) and others, but no experience with more modern solutions from Silicon Optix and Gennum.

Manufacturers already have all the firmware code (i.e. graphics drivers) they need to implement a cheap, low-performance solution from Genesis (i.e. Faroudja), so it can be difficult to justify the cost -- and delay in time to market -- to engineer the firmware (graphics driver) and implementation for a completely new video processor architecture. Silicon Optix and Gennum offer reference implementations (source code), but it's still quite a task to properly integrate that hardware and software with the platform used by the TV. According to Silicon Optix, the R&D necessary to implement the Realta in a new display adds $200 to $300 to the final cost (depending on volume). Of course, the knowledge and experience gained could be leveraged with future displays based on that technology.

The overwhelming majority of LCD manufacturers now re-use older [video processor] hardware and software designs with their latest 1080p panels as a means to speed time to market. They use display processors whose architectures were designed well before we even had 1080p panels, with core video firmware (driver software) created years ago -- and you wonder why scaling quality -- and hence SD quality -- is so horrid?

I've got E* SD, and, since quite a few people around here have said that D*'s SD is even slightly worse than E*'s, I could never in good conscious recommend D* (or E*) to anyone who's main priority is picture quality.

Even on my 50" Pioneer plasma, which normally does a good job with cleaner SD, E*'s SD can range from just barely acceptable to downright horrible in general, although there are a few odd, never-watched channels that do look pretty good consistently, like the CCTV 9 and CCTV E&F Chinese channels (better standards to start out with over there, I presume). Nat. Geographic and Discovery often look pretty good at times, too, because much of the programming is shot in HD for their HD channels.

If your display is under 42", SD satellite might not look as bad as it does on mine (it IS much more acceptable on my 32" analog CRT) - but it's still most likely not gonna look better than Comcast digital cable.

With Comcast, make sure you are not using the scaler in the Motorola DCT34xx, as it does a horrible job. Turn the box off, press menu, and make sure you have 4:3 override enabled and set to 480i.
Right now I have the override set to 480p, I'll switch tonight but I don't expect any improvement. Right now the digital SD channels do not look any better than the analog ones, it's really bad.





You didn't state the make/model of your display, but the following may also shed some light on the issue:
I have a Toshiba 57HX83 RPTV. A couple years ago we had Dish Network in our apartment complex and the PQ of all of their channels was just great, this was before I'd ever seen any HD material at all so it's hard to say what my eyes are conditioned to seeing now but there's no way the SD stuff was as bad as it is with Comcast. Maybe I should call them to come out and check the signal or something?
Thanks for the reply, very helpful. It's funny, I posted pretty much this same question on dbstalk and got very different responses, it does make it even more confusing a bit but all input is helpful and will help me determine my best move. I really want to think about what provider I want to be with in the future, not just in the present too.

Right now I have the override set to 480p, I'll switch tonight but I don't expect any improvement. Right now the digital SD channels do not look any better than the analog ones, it's really bad.The Motorola STBs do a poor job with deinterlace, so you should see an improvement with the box set to output SD as 480i. It should be most obvious on film-sourced content, such as movies on HBO SD. Make sure Cinema Mode (3/2 pulldown) is enabled on your Toshiba.

A couple years ago we had Dish Network in our apartment complex and the PQ of all of their channels was just great, this was before I'd ever seen any HD material at all so it's hard to say what my eyes are conditioned to seeing now but there's no way the SD stuff was as bad as it is with Comcast. Maybe I should call them to come out and check the signal or something?Years and years ago, Dish Network and DirecTV had the best SD quality available anywhere. They used to pass 640x480 resolution on their SD channels and 18Mbps 1920x1080 on every 1080i HD channel. But those days are long gone.

The national "pipe" used by DirecTV and Dish Network to provide service hasn't kept up with the amount of channels they've added. Channels got squeezed more and more until they reached the point where they are now.

Thanks for the reply, very helpful. It's funny, I posted pretty much this same question on dbstalk and got very different responses, it does make it even more confusing a bit but all input is helpful and will help me determine my best move. I really want to think about what provider I want to be with in the future, not just in the present too.Some guys over there are obviously biased in favor of one or another, as is pretty apparent from the Dish vs DirecTV threads. A significant percentage of DBSTalk members still use 27-35" TVs and are more value-oriented; AVS has value-oriented members too, but most AVS participants have HDTVs and many place a higher priority on picture quality --- they are willing to pay a bit more for it.

When members are comparing satellite to cable, make sure they are comparing digital channels. A lot of members on those satellite forums live in smaller markets or rural areas, where cable systems may be older (if they have them at all), with limited or no digital simulcast. No one will argue that Comcast analog SD channels could be unwatchable in areas / homes with poor signal levels, with ghosting, snow, and other analog artifacts. Compared to that, Dish and DirecTV SD is a definite improvement. But not every customer suffers from a poor analog signal, and digital simulcast -- now used in most service areas-- addresses that issue.

If you do decide to try satellite, I would keep Comcast temporarily so you can compare. I would also make sure you are able to cancel if you aren't satisfied. In the past, you could cancel satellite service in the first 30 days and you weren't stuck with the one-year or two-year contract, but I would make sure that option is still available.

I really want to think about what provider I want to be with in the future, not just in the present too.Cable generally requires no commitment, so you can always switch or add another service any time you want. You've got to be more careful with satellite, because they make you commit to one or two years of service, and both content and picture quality can change significantly in a two year period (and not always for the better), as many Dish/DirecTV subscribers have seen.

but there's no way the SD stuff was as bad as it is with Comcast. Maybe I should call them to come out and check the signal or something?With digital channels, there is no analog interference, so for the most part, signal quality is no longer an issue. If you are seeing dropped frames, audio dropouts, or picture breakup, then that would be a signal issue that Comcast could fix.