I am a current E* customer. Non-HD. I had thought about upgrading to HD service but looking at the channel line-up I *might* watch 6 HD channels out of the 29 (or 32....?) offered. AND they don't offer my locals in HD (I put up a CM4228 this past weekend so... *shrug*)

So I started reading.... and reading... it's very confusing. I have decided I'm not in a hurry to upgrade with E*. I seem to be reading that D* and E* are going to see-saw through which one has more HD channels for a while. Capacity doesn't mean squat to me. Heck I have the CAPACITY to make love 6 times in an afternoon... but my wife won't LET me so capacity means nothing.

Can someone summarize how this whole thing appears to be shaping up? Does E* do MPEG4 and D* does not? Any predictions as to whether they'll be adding worthwhile HD content or just offering junk I won't watch? (OH BOY! A SHOPPING CHANNEL IN HD!)

I know this is a pretty tall request, but for someone just coming in to this whole thing it really is confusing and trying to make sense of all of the different stories is tough. I won't go back to cable (TWC in my area... and they are stinking up the place worse than the dairy farms! hehehe).

If I just hold off doing anything until fall of this year... will anything be different? Or will I tehn be waiting for a december launch from E* and then waiting until spring to actually see channels from new birds?

I'm old... and all of the info seems to be swirling on the surface of my brain instead of sinking in. :)

Thanks!

Since you wont be going to cable....

D* is launching 2 new sats later this year to provide the capacity of 150 HD channels and 1500 locals (which you will only get your locals) all in mpeg-4. They have already signed on with many different channels. The list is on here so do a search for it. There has been no confimation from D* as to if they will continue to do HD-Lite or go back to real HD.

That's the D* side. I don't know much about E*, but if Fios is an option in your area maybe you should check that out too.

DirecTV is launching two new sats very shortly, which will give them the capacity for 1500 local into local market HD channels and 150 national HD channels. They have issued various statements saying they will have 100 national HD channels. This may be a slight exaggeration, but not by much, as a good number of channels have announced they will go HD since DirecTV made their announcement, and have announced agreements with DirecTV

Dish Network just announced they too will launch new sats that will give them additional HD capacity, but it's not known when they will be ready for use, and none of the HD channels have made any announcements about Dish Network carriage. At a minimum, I'd guess the new sats will be ready no sooner than next year, although Dish may add a few new HD channels before then.

The bottom line is that right now Dish has the HD channel advantage, but this should change drastically in DirecTV's favor, in the next few months.

Both use MPEG4 for all new HD. Both are currently reducing HD image quality, roughly the same for most HD channels, and in comparison a decent Cable system will have better HD image quality.

yardbird: DirecTV now offers Buffalo locals for ABC, Fox and NBC.

If I were you I might look in Canadian satellite service. Your reception should be great, and you can easily get East and West Coast network HD feeds.

It may be a technicality, but I think "HD network" should be qualified, if it's considered a comparing factor.

With a lot of these new network announcements, notably from some of the existing SD networks, I'm highly inclined to believe that many will debut with little to no HD. Instead, what will be available and touted as HD will be upconverted SD simulcast.

The inevitable "we've got more HD channels" claims don't mean a whole lot if some of what we're talking about is stretch-o-vision. We've seen it before, and we'll see it again, especially as the new "HD" additions pick up pace.

I think I'll just sit back and relax a while. Watching my locals in HD OTA is ok for now. And I do see that a lot of that local "HD" programming is just SD (with sidebars). I'm just not seeing enough compelling programming from EITHER D* or E* to make me REALLY want to upgrade (or switch) my satellite service to HD. Maybe it's not their fault. Maybe there's just a lack of compelling HD content out there at this time. I would LOVE to see the Planet Earth series in HD, but that alone is not going to make me go through the upgrade.

I think I'll just sit back and relax a while. Watching my locals in HD OTA is ok for now. And I do see that a lot of that local "HD" programming is just SD (with sidebars). I'm just not seeing enough compelling programming from EITHER D* or E* to make me REALLY want to upgrade (or switch) my satellite service to HD. Maybe it's not their fault. Maybe there's just a lack of compelling HD content out there at this time. I would LOVE to see the Planet Earth series in HD, but that alone is not going to make me go through the upgrade.Yeah, if you're not into HD movies (HDNET Movies, FilmFest, Monsters, World Cinema), HD sports (ESPN1&2 HD, TNT), or HD entertainment (RAVE, HDNET), it's really not worth it.

I really enjoy watching my local news in HD (Fox and ABC). The Dan Rather reports on HDNet are very good as well. But, the OP makes a valid point. For him, the current HD offerings are just not compelling enough to spend the dollars for the switch.

I think I'll just sit back and relax a while. Watching my locals in HD OTA is ok for now. And I do see that a lot of that local "HD" programming is just SD (with sidebars). I'm just not seeing enough compelling programming from EITHER D* or E* to make me REALLY want to upgrade (or switch) my satellite service to HD. Maybe it's not their fault. Maybe there's just a lack of compelling HD content out there at this time. I would LOVE to see the Planet Earth series in HD, but that alone is not going to make me go through the upgrade.
I am in your boat. I've had an HD TV and D* for a few years now and I've settled into only ordering the HD package during football season. The rest of the year I just don't think the 10 bucks a month is worth it. But I have been called cheap at times :o

Another thing to consider is HD DVRs. I can't imagine life without my HD Tivo (or equivalent). Even if the only HD I record is OTA.

5-6 months ago when i compared d* and e*, e* had better quality hd channels and many more channels to choose from. now i'm reading, but really haven't noticed that e* is now compressing their signals as much as d*. this may be true but is difficult to discern in normal viewing. e*'s hbo hd is a very good signal and we enjoy great pq watching movies on hbo. it is clearly superior to all other channels. d* is supposed to have more channes than e* by years end. will have to wait and see what both have at that time. i guess both are going to mpeg4 which i understand will provide even more compression for their broadcasts. cable seems to have the best pq but in my area only offers 8 channels at a cost exceeding my e* package. e's 622 dvr is superb, as good as a tivo because it is a ripped off tivo.

sounds to me like you should wait to see where we are at by years end. as for me, i'd rather get hd lite on 30 channels than 8 good quality hd channels

regarding the DVRs for both D* and E*...
I'm not if I understood this correctly, but with D*.... if you have 2 DVRs (one in living room and another in a bedroom)... if you record something on the living room DVR... can you watch it on the bedroom DVR? I seem to recall someone telling me you could. That it's a TiVo thing.

With my NON-HD E* DVRs I can not currently do that. I know if I use one DVR to serve 2 rooms, THEN you can do it with an E* DVR, but not if you have 2 separate DVRs. I currently have a dual tuner DVR in the living room and a single tuner DVR in the bedroom. If I switch to HD on E*, they'll replace my dual tuner DVR in the living room with the VIP622 (also dual, but HD). However they are basically telling me I'm on my own for the bedroom. They don't HAVE a single tuner DVR for HD. Ok well.... they KINDA do... or at least they've announced it a few times. The VIP612 is a dual tuner, but SINGLE OUTPUT HD DVR. Less expensive. But nowhere to be found. E* tells me they'll sell me a second VIP622 for $549. I told them ... well I said, "no thanks".

What I *might* do when the time comes is just upgrade the living room receiver and keep the bedroom one like it is. No emergency to have HD in the bedroom. But it certainly is a quandry...

Cable has ABC,NBC,CBS,PBS,Fox, (no CW),TNT,ESPN1 AND 2,discovery HT,AnE,MHD,Yes,HBO,Max,starz,showtime,HDNEt,HDNEtmovies and Mojo

...Both use MPEG4 for all new HD. Both are currently reducing HD image quality, roughly the same for most HD channels, and in comparison a decent Cable system will have better HD image quality.

Really? I thought Dish still offered a number of channels at 1920 by 1080 and with less compression on some channels? And that Direct offered all HD channels at 1280 by 1080?

I may also soon be in a situation, where cable and off the air are unfortunately not options...

Really? I thought Dish still offered a number of channels at 1920 by 1080 and with less compression on some channels? And that Direct offered all HD channels at 1280 by 1080?

I may also soon be in a situation, where cable and off the air are unfortunately not options...


E* still has channels in 1920x1080i. Frankly their h.264 using new encoders look better than most cable. D* is the only one that sucks completely.

Cable has ABC,NBC,CBS,PBS,Fox, (no CW),TNT,ESPN1 AND 2,discovery HT,AnE,MHD,Yes,HBO,Max,starz,showtime,HDNEt,HDNEtmovies and Mojo

Depends on the area, some cable cos offer the CW in HD if its available in a given area.

Based on YES you are in a New York DMA and a TWC sub because you have the HDNets.

Comcast doesn't offer the HDNets, but has VSGLF that shows Versus and The Golf Channel in HD.

Every provider is different and some people are lucky enough to have multiple providers to choose from.

E* still has channels in 1920x1080i. Frankly their h.264 using new encoders look better than most cable. D* is the only one that sucks completely.

There is not a single channel that E* offers that that don't either reduce the res or bit rate. Funny but if you look at the recent independent Picture Quality test of HD providers D* is rated better then E*.

regarding the DVRs for both D* and E*...
I'm not if I understood this correctly, but with D*.... if you have 2 DVRs (one in living room and another in a bedroom)... if you record something on the living room DVR... can you watch it on the bedroom DVR? I seem to recall someone telling me you could. That it's a TiVo thing.
With a hacked DirecTivo, you can do that. However, the HR10-250 (HD DirectTivo) cannot be found anymore except places like ebay. The new DirecTV box is the HR20 (http://www.dbstalk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=112) which cannot do that. It does, however, support networking such that you may play music/videos/pictures thru the HR20 off your home network. This feature alone has me very interested in this box.

the dish 622 dvr will let you record shows and watch them on either of 2 tvs. we use it for our big screen and bedroom tvs.

There is not a single channel that E* offers that that don't either reduce the res or bit rate. Funny but if you look at the recent independent Picture Quality test of HD providers D* is rated better then E*.

Can you provide a link to your comment?

as for me, i'd rather get hd lite on 30 channels than 8 good quality hd channels

What about 50 SD channels rather than 30 hd lite channels? Or what about 100 SD lite channels rather than 50 SD channels?

You know you could just watch YouTube on your computer. It sounds like you'd be happy with that and the choices are enormous.

the dish 622 dvr will let you record shows and watch them on either of 2 tvs. we use it for our big screen and bedroom tvs.

But TV #2 will only get SD. If that's the best they can do I'll keep my regular old SD DVR in the bedroom and just upgrade the living room receiver to HD. I need the DVR in the bedroom and I'm not willing to pay E* $549 to get a second VIP622.

Can you provide a link to your comment?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=841935

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=841935


I am doing my best to avoid laughing out loud right now at the very thought that anyone on gods good earth would consider that link to be any proof of anything regarding D* and E*... :D

I'm sure there is tons of scientific evidence out there that supports the incontrovertible findings associated with the pepsi challenge as well. :D

I am doing my best to avoid laughing out loud right now at the very thought that anyone on gods good earth would consider that link to be any proof of anything regarding D* and E*... :D


you may want to check out D*'s mpeg 4 hd locals before you talk. If the PQ on the new satellites is anything close to what D* is offering now in mpeg4, it would be a very good thing.

And hopefully E* will follow suit.

you may want to check out D*'s mpeg 4 hd locals before you talk. If the PQ on the new satellites is anything close to what D* is offering now in mpeg4, it would be a very good thing.

And hopefully E* will follow suit.

I've seen D*'s mpeg 4 hd locals already and they aren't bad at all, not as good as OTA, but not bad...

Now...what does your comment have to do with the fact that I thought the link posted as a resource to validate another persons statement was a bunch of rubbish? :rolleyes:

I've seen D*'s mpeg 4 hd locals already and they aren't bad at all, not as good as OTA, but not bad...

Now...what does your comment have to do with the fact that I thought the link posted as a resource to validate another persons statement was a bunch of rubbish? :rolleyes:

that's still an ok opinion to have. :D

I just think it's important to keep in mind that d* does have a hd product currently that can hold it's own against cable and E*.

with D* and E* both moving to mpeg4, the potential for the two sat providers to hold their own PQ-wise with cable would be a huge benefit to all customers.

And if D* does improve pq, hopefully that would be motivation fro E* to do it when their sats go up too.

What about 50 SD channels rather than 30 hd lite channels? Or what about 100 SD lite channels rather than 50 SD channels?

You know you could just watch YouTube on your computer. It sounds like you'd be happy with that and the choices are enormous.


problem is i only watch hd on my big screen. more choices the better. my cable offers me 4 local hd channels and 4 hd sub channels (espn, tnt, etc.). with dish, if nothing is on those channels i have 22 other hd channels to find something. and this happens nearly every day. i like having discovery, national geo, hd movie channel, and others available. yeah they're compressed but they still have far more resolution than any sd channel. and my xbr2 upgrades everything to broadcast in 1080p so it looks pretty good. when my cable finishes upgrading our area and starts offering dozens of hd channels i will consider switching. but that won't happen for at least a year. for now i'm happy

that's still an ok opinion to have. :D

I just think it's important to keep in mind that d* does have a hd product currently that can hold it's own against cable and E*.

with D* and E* both moving to mpeg4, the potential for the two sat providers to hold their own PQ-wise with cable would be a huge benefit to all customers.

And if D* does improve pq, hopefully that would be motivation fro E* to do it when their sats go up too.


But D* does not have an hd product currently that can hold it's own against cable and E*. Pretty much admitted it when they lauched their 'dance of 100 channels' initiative years ago.

I totally agree that competition regarding PQ, new channels, etc...can only be a good thing. In then end, I think thats what we all are hoping for...but right now, things certainly aren't worth bragging about for any reason. :p

But D* does not have an hd product currently that can hold it's own against cable and E*. Pretty much admitted it when they lauched their 'dance of 100 channels' initiative years ago.

When looking at current HD PQ of D*'s overall hd package, they are obviously the worst (regardless of what that one study showed, it may have been skewed if some mpeg4 locals were included, which made E* look like the worst). But their mpeg4 locals can hold their own pq-wise. Now their mpeg2 hd lite is a different story.

but if the new channels are as good as the mpeg4 locals (at least in the prime locations whee they are near OTA PQ.) than E* will have some catching up to do.

When looking at current HD PQ of D*'s overall hd package, they are obviously the worst (regardless of what that one study showed, it may have been skewed if some mpeg4 locals were included, which made E* look like the worst). But their mpeg4 locals can hold their own pq-wise. Now their mpeg2 hd lite is a different story.

but if the new channels are as good as the mpeg4 locals (at least in the prime locations whee they are near OTA PQ.) than E* will have some catching up to do.


Well, that waits to be seen all the way around, now doesn't it... :rolleyes:

But honestly, I hardly watch my locals via E*. I like my OTA so I'm not the best source for anything other than OTA looks better than E* HD-lil, and I saw D* once and it didn't look bad at all. Could have looked much worse, given D*'s usual low standards...

that 'study' was for comcast and did no direct comparison between D* and E*...thats why I wrote it off as a joke... :p

I have both local options (OTA and E*). The MPEG4 locals are very close in picture quality to OTA. The new MPEG4 HD channels like STARZ, Max, NGHD and HGTV for example are better than their MPEG2 versions. The new MPEG4 systems that E* is using seems to be working very well so far. If and when they mirror all SD and HD channels in true MPEG4, based upon current observation, picture quality should be at least the same, but I am anticipating it to be better. I hope D* succeeds in its efforts to provide more HD channels with better picture quality. Competition is a good thing and will force the other providers to keep pace and/or improve picture quality even more. This will only benefit us, the consumer.

sounds to me like you should wait to see where we are at by years end. as for me, i'd rather get hd lite on 30 channels than 8 good quality hd channels

I used to think like that but the more I watch HDDVD and Blu-Ray disks,the more I miss having high quality HD channels.

I have become very disapointed with D* PQ so I had dumped Showtime HD and HBO HD and used that money towards a higher membership to Netflix.

I only keep the HD pack on D* for the UHD Channel because they carry things like Battlestar/Stargate/etc. which even though it is 'HD Lite', it is a whole lot better than their SD counterpart.



It really hit me last night as I finished watching a Blu-Ray disk of 'Planet Earth' and in particular the 'Mountains' episode.

After that episode was over,I looked to see what was on my HDTIVO.
I noticed that the HDTIVO had recorded 'Mountains' from Discovery HD Theater on Directv.

I watched the first 10 minutes of it(interesting that the Blu Ray version has David Attenborough narrating) and I was quite astounded to see how much worse the picture from D* looked.

This was not a case where I was doing a controlled A/B comparison looking for differences. Rather the PQ difference jumps out at you.
I merely watched the Discovery HD episode after watching it on the Blu-Ray player.


In 2 weeks, FIOS is being installed at my house after being a nearly 10 year sub to Directv because I have seen first hand how much better the HD Picture Quaility is on FIOS.

For me, Quality trumps Quantity when it comes to my TV viewing.