Comcast HDTV

[bicker1]

Originally Posted by jmallory

No one is getting screwed. ... Analog cable was always meant to be a temporary stop gap measure.

I don't know where you're getting that. Analog cable was originally as permanent as QAM is going to be.

I agree with you that no one is "getting screwed" -- I wrote that more or less to speak in the parlance of the folks who advocate the ending of analog cable service, who I perceived as seeing the current situation as one within which they are "deprived" of additional HD channels and "subject to" 3:1 muxing. In reality, no one is getting screwed. Things are the way they are as a reflection of how they should be given the fact that there are conflicting needs in this space.

Originally Posted by jmallory

That being said, no one made any promises of what services would be on analog cable other than the local must-carry channels.

Consumers are, as a rule, not a rational entity, so explicit promises, while the only defensible foundation for asserting what should be provided, often serve only as a bedrock foundation of what is expected as a minimum. Again: It isn't right, but that's the way many consumers are. How that plays into this is that if there is too big of a gulf between the admittedly indefensible expectations on the part of consumers and what they're actually provided, then providers run the risk of a mob-like reaction, leading to new, onerous regulation, imposing satisfaction of these expectations, often in a manner that results in far less efficiency and flexibility for the future than if the supplier satisfies them voluntarily.

So that's why analog cable service remains, and shall remain for a while longer, effectively delaying advancement of digital services.

Originally Posted by jmallory

I believe the way Comcast is doing it, a "mostly" digital system is the best way forward that provides the most options.

Be careful: Saying anything positive about what Comcast does is likely to get you crucified as a Comcast insider.

Seriously, based on their professional expertise, what they're doing is indeed probably the right thing to do: slowly evolving to a mostly digital system. However, that means digitalphiles living with the delay, and living with the sub-optimal end-result, since even 30 analog channels is a cost against potential alternative digital service.

Originally Posted by jmallory

We, as consumers, have to be realistic.

Sacrilege!

[slowbiscuit]

Originally Posted by bicker1

I agree with you that no one is "getting screwed" -- I wrote that more or less to speak in the parlance of the folks who advocate the ending of analog cable service, who I perceived as seeing the current situation as one within which they are "deprived" of additional HD channels and "subject to" 3:1 muxing. In reality, no one is getting screwed. Things are the way they are as a reflection of how they should be given the fact that there are conflicting needs in this space.

Anyone using analog-only sets that will now have to pay for STBs/DTAs for the same level of service they had before is getting screwed. Period, full stop. They are paying more for power-sucking, heat-generating boxes they did not need before, for the same channels they had before.

And we're talking about tens of millions of people here.

Again, I don't have a prob buying digital sets if I can get exp. basic in clear QAM without a box (plus all the nice HD channels we get in the clear now), but I'm sure plenty of other folks would not be so happy about such an outlay. And so they are just going to have to suck it up and pay more to benefit the others, or give up the level of service that they had on some of their TVs.

[bicker1]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

Anyone using analog-only sets that will now have to pay for STBs/DTAs for the same level of service they had before is getting screwed.

jmallory: See what I mean?

[jmallory]

Originally Posted by bicker1

I don't know where you're getting that. Analog cable was originally as permanent as QAM is going to be.

I meant as it relates to the digital transition. Not historically, and yes one day we will have these same discussions when we go full IPTV and everyone's QAM equipped sets will need STBs.

[jmallory]

Originally Posted by bicker1

jmallory: See what I mean?

Probably complained when their Cellular carrier cut off AMPS.

Really, a lot of the blame goes to the federal government. They really should have just said, no analog at all after February 19th, 2009. Cable and OTA goes digital at the same time, everyone gets a box or a new TV. Take your pick.

For Comcast's part...they have always said that they would reduce themselves to about 20 - 40 analog channels when they offered public statements on this. If you didn't see this coming, you weren't paying attention. Although, I am surprised at the speed of deployment but I am sure the competition from Verizon, AT&T, Dish, and DirecTV, and RSN is forcing them to go faster than maybe they originally thought.

[bicker1]

Originally Posted by jmallory

Probably complained when their Cellular carrier cut off AMPS.

Indeed. And so you can see why industry needs to balance the needs of progressives (such as yourself) and reactionaries.

Originally Posted by jmallory

Really, a lot of the blame goes to the federal government. They really should have just said, no analog at all after February 19th, 2009.

And taking that other guy's perspective, the blame that the federal government deserves is that they didn't require cable to maintain analog service, for all extended cable services, without any chance of any additional charge, in perpetuity. See how what they're actually doing makes the most sense, given these two diametrically-oppositional perspectives that are both very common?

Originally Posted by jmallory

For Comcast's part...they have always said that they would reduce themselves to about 20 - 40 analog channels when they offered public statements on this. If you didn't see this coming, you weren't paying attention.

I agree that people who continue to deny the inevitable are, in the end, only spiting themselves, but we all will pay a penalty as we're going to have to listen to their whining about it.

[slowbiscuit]

Originally Posted by jmallory

Probably complained when their Cellular carrier cut off AMPS.

No, because the cellphone company did not charge more for the same level of digital service, and I had multiple provider choices for the same level of service in any event.

Look, I hear you - it's all good in the name of progress. And I'm ok with that, but please don't raise the rate on millions to benefit other millions. If we get down to a few diehards, then maybe, but we are nowhere near that level with analog.

[b_scott]

Originally Posted by jmallory

Probably complained when their Cellular carrier cut off AMPS.

Really, a lot of the blame goes to the federal government. They really should have just said, no analog at all after February 19th, 2009. Cable and OTA goes digital at the same time, everyone gets a box or a new TV. Take your pick.

For Comcast's part...they have always said that they would reduce themselves to about 20 - 40 analog channels when they offered public statements on this. If you didn't see this coming, you weren't paying attention. Although, I am surprised at the speed of deployment but I am sure the competition from Verizon, AT&T, Dish, and DirecTV, and RSN is forcing them to go faster than maybe they originally thought.

this.

[bicker1]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

No, because the cellphone company did not charge more for the same level of digital service

Yes they did. Before they cut off AMPS, they started charging more for it than for the latest generation service.

[slowbiscuit]

Digital service, not analog. Didn't cost more to switch than to stay on AMPS. In fact one could say it was less, because there was a wider variety of phones to choose from as well. Maybe the same will be true for cable when (if) we can actually BUY two-way boxes or sets.

But we digress.

[oldcband]

I know this has been asked a zillion times but here it goes again.

I'm not happy with Comcast. But before I jump to Direct TV, will it be the right move.

My Comcast HD changes all the time with signal quality.

Anybody changed to Direct and happy they did?

[jmallory]

Originally Posted by bicker1

And taking that other guy's perspective, the blame that the federal government deserves is that they didn't require cable to maintain analog service, for all extended cable services, without any chance of any additional charge, in perpetuity. See how what they're actually doing makes the most sense, given these two diametrically-oppositional perspectives that are both very common?

Realizing you are playing devil's advocate here, but why should the government be giving Telco and DBS providers an competitive advantage by forcing Cable to provide full analog service? If this is a "free market" (current events on Wall Street notwithstanding) economy; if Comcast wants to take the risk of losing low-margin analog customers to gain more high-margin Digital / HD customers isn't that their right as a business?

[jmallory]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

Digital service, not analog. Didn't cost more to switch than to stay on AMPS. In fact one could say it was less, because there was a wider variety of phones to choose from as well. Maybe the same will be true for cable when (if) we can actually BUY two-way boxes or sets.

But we digress.

Well if you are paying anywhere from $35-$500 for a DTA, STB, or DVR you can still say your costs increased for the same level of service. I don't see how renting vs buying changes the argument.

[jmallory]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

No, because the cellphone company did not charge more for the same level of digital service, and I had multiple provider choices for the same level of service in any event.

Look, I hear you - it's all good in the name of progress. And I'm ok with that, but please don't raise the rate on millions to benefit other millions. If we get down to a few diehards, then maybe, but we are nowhere near that level with analog.

Well what is the magic number? Because right now over half of Comcast's customers are digital (meaning they have at least one digital STB).

And I would bet that a large portion of those complaining already have digital service on a main TV plus probably another in a bedroom or two but absolutely have to have 60 or 70 channels on their kitchen TVs, bathroom TVs, garage TVs. I mean do we really have to wait until all those TVs are replaced before we can start talking about getting rid of analog TV?

[b_scott]

this is what i'm saying. if that were the case it'll never happen, because some people still have TV's from the 70's.

[maxman]

Originally Posted by oldcband

I know this has been asked a zillion times but here it goes again.

I'm not happy with Comcast. But before I jump to Direct TV, will it be the right move.

My Comcast HD changes all the time with signal quality.

Anybody changed to Direct and happy they did?

My friend just did (left Comcast) a few weeks ago and he doesn't miss a chance to rave about it and rub it in that I'm still with Comcast. In my area I'm expecting FIOS any day so I'm holding out. I could be disappointed, of course, if it doesn't happen.

[bicker1]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

Didn't cost more to switch than to stay on AMPS.

Service on the old technology cost more that service on the new technology. The actual monthly service fee. I believe it was a $5 difference. People were (foolishly) indignant about it.

[bicker1]

Originally Posted by jmallory

Realizing you are playing devil's advocate here

Well, just highlighting both sides of the issue, to support my contention that the company has to strike a balance.

Originally Posted by jmallory

but why should the government be giving Telco and DBS providers an competitive advantage by forcing Cable to provide full analog service?

No friggen good reason whatsoever, AFAIC. Unfortunately, that's not the reality that Comcast has to deal with.

Originally Posted by jmallory

Well what is the magic number? Because right now over half of Comcast's customers are digital (meaning they have at least one digital STB).

That's a problematic way of looking at it. I have one digital outlet and one analog outlet. Don't count me as digital, because if they go all-digital, my second television will be a paperweight. I think it is important to consider digital customers as those who have only digital outlets, and that number is really small.

Not that should matter.

Originally Posted by jmallory

And I would bet that a large portion of those complaining already have digital service on a main TV plus probably another in a bedroom or two but absolutely have to have 60 or 70 channels on their kitchen TVs, bathroom TVs, garage TVs. I mean do we really have to wait until all those TVs are replaced before we can start talking about getting rid of analog TV?

Not all, but isn't it reasonable to say at least a majority?

[slowbiscuit]

Originally Posted by jmallory

Well if you are paying anywhere from $35-$500 for a DTA, STB, or DVR you can still say your costs increased for the same level of service. I don't see how renting vs buying changes the argument.

You're right, but a competitive marketplace for tru2way devices can change a lot of minds. We'll see, but I'm not holding my breath given the current Cablecard device 'market'.

[b_scott]

will those Chicago channels be part of the digital starter? probably not. :\

[keithbart]

Originally Posted by donn35

Good news! I have spoke with Maria, a customer service representative and she told me that Comcast will add the following HD channels by the end of September, including some surprises: Lifetime Channel, Lifetime Movie Network, ESPNews, Travel Channel, Toon Disney, MGM, & Fearnet. She didn't give an exact date when these channels will be launched but they will be added by the end of this month.

You must have found someone who knows what she's talking about.
Everytime I call to ask about new HD channels they always give me the
old ones that were added a month or two ago.

[donn35]

Originally Posted by briansemerick

will those Chicago channels be part of the digital starter? probably not. :\

You will found out next month whenever you receive your cable bill or just contact Comcast & speak with a CSR. According to Maria, there will be changes beginning in October regarding certain packages such as digital starter or digital premier.

[skimoney22]

Anyone else notice when comcast adds a new series to on demand it seems that the audio is messed up?
Three weeks ago they added 2 Sons Of Anarchy premieres, one only had background noise.
Always sunny in Philly. episode two is missing the audio also?
The weird thing about the Fx hd show is the begining where they show parental warnings MVA yellow screen is HD (no black bars on sides). The opening scene is in HD, then the rest of the show has the black bars on the sides. Its like they filmed the first 30 seconds in hd and not the rest.
The second episode without the audio has black bars, although I only watched a mintue or two.
Its like VH1's HD on demand shows, they are in the category of HD but they are obviously not HD.

[bicker1]

Often, problems with On Demand stem from problems with the source, in this case F/X. I remember when Mad Men first made it onto On Demand in HD, we complained that there was no Closed Captioning for the Hearing Impaired. Tracking the problem back led all the way to AMC, who admitted that they're not prepared to provide Closed Captioning for programming that they provide for VOD distribution.

[SpeedEuphoria]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

Again, I don't have a prob buying digital sets if I can get exp. basic in clear QAM without a box (plus all the nice HD channels we get in the clear now)

Originally Posted by jmallory

everyone gets a box or a new TV. Take your pick.

Hey on this Comcast deal, they are supposedly switching over the extended basic in my area starting today.

We have all the "free" boxes installed, except on my newer TV that is digital/QAM.

I was under the assumption that when they switch the extended basic channels to digital(what they are doing now) that I would NOT need a box for this TV since its newer/digital(part of the reason I bought this TV)

They told me flat out that I need a box for it. They had no explanation. I said I have a TV that is HD/digital and they said it doesnt matter the signal is going to be digital and I need a box.

So the only thing I could think of is that the signal is going to be encrypted or something or the service people are very uninformed.

Please shed some light

Thanks in advance

[wareagle]

Originally Posted by SpeedEuphoria

...
So the only thing I could think of is that the signal is going to be encrypted or something or the service people are very uninformed.
...

Encrypted.

[LongRufus]

Originally Posted by SpeedEuphoria

Hey on this Comcast deal, they are supposedly switching over the extended basic in my area starting today.

We have all the "free" boxes installed, except on my newer TV that is digital/QAM.

I was under the assumption that when they switch the extended basic channels to digital(what they are doing now) that I would NOT need a box for this TV since its newer/digital(part of the reason I bought this TV)

They told me flat out that I need a box for it. They had no explanation. I said I have a TV that is HD/digital and they said it doesnt matter the signal is going to be digital and I need a box.

So the only thing I could think of is that the signal is going to be encrypted or something or the service people are very uninformed.

Please shed some light

Thanks in advance

As wareagle said, the expanded channels will be encrypted. It's the easiest way for them to control their tier system. If they sent out all of the expanded channels unencrypted in the clear, everyone would downgrade their packages to limited basic and get the expanded channels for free. To get anything over the limited basic package, you must have either a Comcast STB or CableCard.

[slowbiscuit]

That's not true - they can move the digital expanded basic channels to the analog freqs and then use the same traps that they already have installed for limited to keep those customers from seeing them in the clear. Whether they want to keep using traps or not is a different question.

[sebadooo]

When using Comcast On Demand (HD or otherwise), I periodically get a horizontal white line that 'flashes' on the screen for a split second and then doesn't appear for several more minutes. This never happens while using "live" cable, or on any other sources. Has anyone else noticed this? I'm in CT, not that that should matter. I'm guessing something happened when movies were loaded on to their system.

[Ken H]

Originally Posted by slowbiscuit

That's not true - they can move the digital expanded basic channels to the analog freqs and then use the same traps that they already have installed for limited to keep those customers from seeing them in the clear. Whether they want to keep using traps or not is a different question.

Traps can cause other network issues. Unless they come up with something new, which they may do, the older traps will probably be removed.