or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Portland, ME - HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Portland, ME - HDTV - Page 10

post #271 of 4993
darey1: I would like to see Cartwright's reply, too.

And I understand the Portland Press Herald is working on a story about the Time Warner-WGME disagreement. Could be in Friday's paper.
post #272 of 4993
Warning - This is long and disgusting!!!

Here is my e-mail to him -

Dave Arey wrote:


Mr Cartwright, We the subscribers to Time Warner Cable are very disappointed that WGME has had the capability of broadcasting a High Definition signal to South Maine for well over a year, yet, it has not be provided to us folks that are customers of Time Warner Cable. I understand that the decision may not be yours, but it may be a Sinclair problem. It would be greatly appreciated by many of us HD viewers if your company would allow the Superbowl to be broadcast in High Definition over Time Warner Cable. It would be good for your station's name and a step forward in trying to establish a permanent agreement with Time Warner. High definition is one of the hottest sellers of televisions and the best picture I have ever seen. I'm sure you are aware that currently the only local station broadcasting in HD on cable is WCSH and we enjoy it very much. Please see if there is something that can be worked out with corporate, if that's what needed. You folks worked out a deal for the Masters last year over Time Warner and there is no reason why this couldn't be worked out somehow. Thank you very much for your time and I hope something can be worked out since it is our beloved Patriots. Sincerely
Dave Arey
Time Warner HDTV Customer

His first answer was

Dave,
The allegation that we are not broadcasting in high definition is absurd. We were the first station to broadcast in high definition in the Portland market. We do not charge you any money for our signal. Time Warner does. Why are you on their side? I am puzzled over this. Does your television have a tuner? We are broadcasting free-of-charge on channel 38. It is a beautiful picture.
Alan

His second answer I think is the canned Sinclair answer:

Dear Dave,
As you are aware, the digital television signal of WGME-TV is not currently carried on local cable systems. As explained below, the reason for this is quite simple -- the cable companies have unfairly refused to pay WGME-TV for the right to transmit its digital signal.

In many ways, your cable company is no different than a store. It buys products at wholesale and then resells them to consumers at a higher price in order to make a profit. In other words, just like a grocery store buys food and then resells it to its customers, cable companies buy television programming and resell it to their subscribers. Inexplicably, however, the cable companies do not think they should have to pay to acquire content broadcast on local broadcast television stations like WGME-TV.

The cable companies' position is very surprising given that the model in which they pay to acquire the right to sell television programming is well established. The cable companies routinely pay to carry the signals of cable networks, such as ESPN, CNN, MTV and yes, even Animal Planet. They do this, but refuse to pay for the programming of local television stations, even though the programming on local television stations generally attracts far larger audiences than does the programming on the cable networks.

The cable companies claim that they do not pay for local broadcast television stations because the mere act of carrying the stations, and thus making the signal more accessible to cable subscribers, is consideration enough. The absurdity of such a claim is clear as soon as one stops to consider the standard practice within the cable industry of paying cable only networks for their signal. After all, if carriage of a local broadcast signal provides sufficient consideration to the local television station, carriage alone would certainly be sufficient consideration for the cable networks (which rely exclusively on cable carriage to reach their viewers) such as HGTV and Nickelodeon. The cable companies' position is no different than a grocery store refusing to pay Kellogg's for boxes of Fruit Loops, on the theory that just being on the shelf where consumers can buy the cereal should be payment enough.

The cable companies also like to claim that their subscribers will not pay for local channels because they do not really care if they receive local stations via cable since they can already receive them free over-the-air. This simply is not true, as evidenced by the complaints cable companies routinely receive if they do not carry a local broadcast station. Further evidence has been provided by the large number of people who signed up for satellite service, such as DirecTV and Dish Network, and abandoned cable service, only after satellite began offering carriage of local channels. In addition, the vast majority of satellite subscribers pay either $5.00 or $6.00 per month simply to receive their local channels via satellite. As Television Week, a major industry publication, recently noted, the addition of local stations to satellite removed one of the most compelling attributes cable has had over satellite.

In addition, the cable companies use the carriage of local television stations' digital signals as a way to retain existing subscribers and attract new ones. They use their carriage of these signals (and such compelling high definition programming as the Super Bowl and the NCAA men's basketball tournament) as a way to entice analog subscribers to switch to higher priced digital service. They use their carriage of high definition digital broadcasts of local stations to differentiate themselves from their competitor, satellite, which currently does not have the requisite bandwidth capacity to carry these signals.

Cable companies benefit when they carry local broadcast channels in the form of more subscribers and higher profits. A portion of the fees their subscribers pay each and every month is to compensate the cable companies for delivering their local broadcast channels. Fundamental fairness dictates that the cable companies should pay the broadcasters for the signals they are reselling.

It's that simple.

Sincerely yours,

Alan Cartwright
General Manager
WGME 13
post #273 of 4993
Quote:


In addition, the cable companies use the carriage of local television stations' digital signals as a way to retain existing subscribers and attract new ones. They use their carriage of these signals (and such compelling high definition programming as the Super Bowl and the NCAA men's basketball tournament) as a way to entice analog subscribers to switch to higher priced digital service. They use their carriage of high definition digital broadcasts of local stations to differentiate themselves from their competitor, satellite, which currently does not have the requisite bandwidth capacity to carry these signals.

As if broadcasting the Super Bowl and a few dramas in HD isn't a way to differentiate themselves from their competitors? And as if local TV stations wouldn't lose advertising dollars if the local cable company chose not to carry them at all? Who's he kidding? They're in a greedy, love-hate relationship, trying to squeeze a few more bucks out of the ultimate purchaser -- you and me.

Quote:


Cable companies benefit when they carry local broadcast channels in the form of more subscribers and higher profits. A portion of the fees their subscribers pay each and every month is to compensate the cable companies for delivering their local broadcast channels. Fundamental fairness dictates that the cable companies should pay the broadcasters for the signals they are reselling.

It's that simple.

So fundamental fairness would also dictate that they get a piece of the pie from Acme TV Repair for every antenna Acme sells? There's nothing simple about this, except Sinclair's greedy desire to make Time Warner and its subscribers pay for their government-mandated upgrade to HDTV. How quickly they forget they hold a broadcast license, not a license to print money.
post #274 of 4993
The second letter is a word-for-word copy of the letter that the Sinclair corporate DTV officer "MisterDTV" posted on the HDTV Programming forum, here.

The cable carriage issue is a common problem with mid-sized media companies in general. Only a modest number of stations owned by these multi-station companies have made the infrastructure investment to gain the ability to broadcast in HD. HD is basically an expense, and there is no way for them short term to recoup any of this investment -- except by cable carriage fees. They don't get any extra income as far as commercial sales go by having HD. They don't get any extra viewers (and actually lose them, as far as Neilson ratings are concerned).

Some of these companies (not just Sinclair -- in Austin, TX, the WB and NBC affiliates are both owned by LIN TV; they were the first in the market to go to high power HD, but they are the only DTV stations not carried by the local Time Warner for the same compensation reason as Sinclair is not here) have decided that cable TV systems DO get value by adding the HD broadcast -- they are able to get folks like us to sign up on their systems because they have HD local programming while systems like DirecTV don't. It seems to me they are RIGHT. All other things equal, how many of you would subscribe to DirecTV or Dish instead of Time Warner? I'm in Adelphia country -- which means I subscribe to DirecTV because Adelphia doesn't have HDTV available. If they did, Adelphia would be earning hundreds of dollars a year from my account. Seems to me that it would be worth their while to compensate WGME for the HD signal.

Don't misunderstand me -- I'm not saying I agree with them -- but I can see why they look at it this way from a business point of view. It seems to me you should be as mad (or madder) at Time Warner for NOT coming to an equitable solution with them as you are with Sinclair for asking for compensation. After all, value added is value added.

While it is true many local affiliates choose to let their DTV signals be carried without additional comensation doesn't mean it is wrong that others choose not to it is their signal.

Just my $.03.

Joe
post #275 of 4993
I'm reposting this from earlier in the thread as there is some updated information

This is the info I have been able to find out about DTV in Maine. Any additions or corrections would be appreciated -- it looks like I am relocating this summer.

Where someone at the station replied to me I listed their name and title (if known), and italicized what they told me.

ERP = effective radiated power
OTA = over the air
STA = special temporary authority
Where I give two numbers for ERP, the first is the special temporary authority (usually a lower power than) the second in parentheses is the full rating

WPME-DT UPN 28 ERP 215 kW not OTA
WPXT-DT WB 4 ERP 10 kW not OTA

Roy Oulette (unknown position)

Our frequencies and power levels did not pass Canadian Coordination so we do not have construction permits for either station. I'm not sure when we will be able to put a digital carrier on the air. We have now entered goverment "red tape" land with the proviso of cross-border relations.(2/03)

As of this past fall, I reconfirmed this with the help of my congressman, Michael Michaud. He was able to get a response from the FCC about the status of these applications -- basically, the FCC is sitting on their thumbs.


WGME-DT CBS 38 500 kW ERP STA (1000 kW ERP) OTA

38-1 Simulcast Analog
38-2 High Definition Channel

Craig Clark (Chief Engineer)

38-2 is active from 12:00PM to 12:30AM


WMTW-DT ABC 46 501 kW ERP STA (1000 kW ERP) OTA

Amy Picucci (Program Coordinator)

Programming on WMTW-DT channel 46 is currently a digital simulcast of the ABC 8 WMTW analog signal from 8-11 pm Monday through Saturday and 7-11 pm on Sundays. These hours will increase in April 2003 to 12 noon to 12 midnight, seven days a week.

We anticipate providing HDTV (High Definition Digital, 720p) pass through of ABC network programs sometime in 2004. (2/03)


Latest news here is that the Hearst-Argyle group is purchasing WMTW (the sale requires approval of the FCC). This may mean that WMTW will have additional capital resources; it also means it could be the last hand in line for capital from the parent company.

http://www.hearstargyle.com/index2.html

Is their website; drop them an email to let them know you are excited they are moving in and encourage them to upgrade the DTV tech here to allow HDTV passthrough.

WCSH-DT NBC 44 500 kW ERP STA (1000 kW ERP) OTA

No Response

From Titan TV, On air 24/7, passing high definition feed when available

WCBB-DT PBS 17 27.9 kW ERP OTA

Response from Dave Roy "Audience Services" concerning the ERP and identical content of WCBB-DT and WMEA-DT.

From Titan TV, the main channel is off air between 1:00 AM and 6:00 AM while the three subchannels are 24/7.WCBB and WMEA both occasionally offer high definition shows during prime time.

WMEA-DT (PBS) 45 50 kW ERP OTA

All other comments are the same as WCBB-DT.

WPFO-TV (Fox) Not OTA -- No digital assignment

Analog only, no digital assignment.

Cable Television:

Adelphia Cable does not carry High Definition at this time.

Time Warner Digital Cable carries the following high definition channels: Showtime and HBO (East and West), INHD 1 and 2, HDNet, HDNet Movies, Discovery HD, NBC (WCSH) and Maine PBS. In York County, they also carry CBS (WBZ -- out of Boston)


I'm adding to the list the stations in Bangor (I'm told they may be receivable in Lewiston, where I am moving to) from Jay Ireland's Bangor Post:

Bangor ME

WVII-DT (ABC) 14 1.84kW ERP STA (532kW ERP) OTA
Simulcast Analog
Contact: engrabc6@wvii.com

WABI-DT (CBS) 19 234kW ERP STA (363kW ERP) OTA
Now in High Definition, active 12:30PM to 12:30AM
Rumor has it that they are broadcasting at high power now; needs to be confirmed.
shilz@wabi.com

WLBZ-DT (NBC) 25 500kW ERP STA (1000kW ERP) OTA
HDTV
lgilbert@wlbz.com

WMEB-DT (PBS) 9 15kW ERP OTA
HD/SDTV Multicast Analog
post #276 of 4993
Anybody watching the pre-game stuff at all? My receiver isn't receiving DD 5.1 - only 2 channels. I'm just wondering if anyone's getting 5.1 in Southern Maine?
post #277 of 4993
Quote:


Originally posted by redinger
I'm just wondering if anyone's getting 5.1 in Southern Maine?

Well, the answer to my question is a no. I got this email from Craig Clark:

Quote:


yes 2 channels, gear on order but did not make it in time for the game

I thought someone mentioned that WGME was able to pass a 5.1 feed, but according to Craig, the gear's not there yet.
post #278 of 4993
Anybody else get to see the game on TWME 504 (WBZ in Boston)? i guess living in saco (York County) finally paid off after all these years. The broadcast was flawless (well, except for that aged breast which was all together to accurate for my eyes). Anyway, thanks to TW for working the deal w/ WBZ just in time for the big game. It was AWESOME!
post #279 of 4993
Quote:


i guess living in saco (York County) finally paid off after all these years. The broadcast was flawless (well, except for that aged breast which was all together to accurate for my eyes).

Ah, the advantages of being a TWMaine customer in Cumberland County. Maybe we should thank WGME13/Sinclair for not keeping us abreast of the situation.
post #280 of 4993
Showtime Championship Boxing Going All-HD


-- Multichannel News, 2/5/2004 2:45:00 PM

Showtime Networks Inc. said Thursday that starting with this Saturday's card, all Showtime Championship Boxing domestic fight cards will air in high-definition on Showtime HD.

The main event of Saturday's card, from Bally's Atlantic City (N.J.), pits former World Boxing Association champion and current International Boxing Federation No. 1 contender Sharmba Mitchell against IBF No. 9 contender Lovemore N'dou for the IBF 140-pound interim title.

The first HD fight on Showtime Championship Boxing was the Mike Tyson-Clifford Etienne heavyweight match last Feb. 22.
post #281 of 4993
I recently e-mailed TWMaine about DVI support for the Scientific Atlanta 3250HD set-top box, and an ETA for an STB with HD and DVR. Here's the reply I received today from Christopher S. Graviss, vice president engineering, Time Warner Cable New England Division:

Quote:


First we will be adding the DVI activation release over the next couple of weeks. If you have a model S/A 3250 HD set top box you will be able to use the DVI port in late February.

Second the S/A 8010 set top box with DVR and HD together is going through testing as we speak. There are some issues that must be addressed to stabilize this new box on Time Warner platforms. We are working closely with S/A to make this happen in a timely manner.

Now if they could just reach agreements with WGME and ESPN for HD ...
post #282 of 4993
that is great news on both counts mainemojo! Now that football season is over, I can wait on ESPN-HD for a little while. Unfortunately, thanks to Sinclair, it doesn't appear that we'll get CBS-HD via TWC for awhile, if at all.
post #283 of 4993
When I lived in Philly (Comcast country) I finally broke down and bought an OTA Reciever to pick up CBS. Philly is a O&O market, and you all probably saw the threads on Comcast and CBS O&O markets. It seemed they would never get an agreement, and the discussions/rumours painted the negotiations as downright hostile. I just threw up my hands and bought the OTA receiver. However there was a happy ending, as Comcast and CBS did finally reach agreement (after I moved, of course). Come to think of it, they've even got ESPN HD now too, and that was really "never going to happen!" So keep the faith!
And I think we've all got to give TW Maine some kudo's: When I moved back to Maine last June they were only carrying HBO and Showtime HD. We've come along way.
One last thought: now that Football season is over, ESPN does become less of a priority for me, but how about NESN-HD? How many days until spring training?
post #284 of 4993
Here is my recent conversation with WGME Mr. Cartwright seems like a very nice man, and he responded to all of my emails very quickly, but it definitely doesnt seem like WGME is on the verge of offering hdtv to time warner.

Michael wrote:
Hello, my name is Michael. I have a high definition TV
and use Time Warner for my TV viewing. I was very excited to
see WCSH and PBS available on Time Warner's high definition
channels. I was even more excited to see that WGME had also developed a High definition broadcast. However, I now find that
you are not sharing this broadcast with Time Warner. I am very
disappointed with your decision, especially in regards to your
upcoming broadcast of the superbowl. I hope that you will
change your mind and allow not only the superbowl but all of
your high definition broadcasting to be shared with Time Warner.
Thank you

Michael,
> > >
> > > Do you have a tuner? Our chief engineer can help you tune to the
> > > crystal clear beautiful picture on Channel 38 ... we spent more
> > > than a million dollars so we could send it to you for free!!!
> > >
> > > Alan Cartwright
> > > WGME-Tv General Manager

Alan,
Thanks for the quick response. No I don't have a tuner. Time
Warner's High definition cable box is actually a HDTV tuner, so I can watch HDTV through their box without the expense of a HDTV tuner. The only down side to that is I have no way of receiving over the air HDTV,
which I guess would be your channel. That is the biggest reason that I would really hope that you would change your mind and partner with Time Warner to offer HDTV through their system. As time goes on, I find myself watching more and more HDTV and less and less regular tv.

From: Alan Cartwright
> Let me know how we can help. I think a tuner runs $300. It would
> save you the need to pay Time Warner monthly ... the antenna is
> inexpensive they tell me .... Alan

Alan,
>
Thanks again for getting back to me, I really appreciate the fact that you are taking the time to do this. I understand that your company was forced, by government regulation, to spend a huge amount of money to upgrade to HDTV broadcasts. It just seems to me that your goal as a company would be to maximize the return on your investment. Time Warner offers a high definition box which includes a tuner and HDTV broadcasts of the "locals" for no additional charges over their
standard packages. This opens up HDTV to a large and growing group of
people who want the advantages that HDTV has to offer. While I guess
I could go back to times past when my parents had a big antenna on the
roof, and I guess I could spend two or three hundred dollars to buy a
tuner, I'm pretty sure that I won't, and I would imagine most other
people in my situation won't either. I would think that by offering
this programming through Time Warner you would be maximizing your
audience and thereby maximizing your advertising dollars.


From Alan:
You only need a very small indoor antenna. The set should have had a tuner, given the amount you paid, but one can be purchased for a few hundred dollars. The picture is phenomenal. We spent more than one million ... that's one million dollars to build a digital transmitter. It would cost you only a few hundred to be able to receive it. You are spending more than that on monthly cable bills. They charge for their pictures, while ours are free. Having said all that, I understand your frustration. Alan
post #285 of 4993
mphinne2,

Cartwright and Sinclair have an interesting way of demonstrating they "understand your frustration," since from what I've read on other forums, Portland is one of only four TWC outposts where there's no HD agreement with the local CBS affiliate. Apparently, they don't empathize as much as many other broadcasters.

Not that TW isn't to blame, too. I appreciate their desire to keep costs down, but I wonder if they have researched whether those of us who have invested hundreds, if not thousands of dollars in HDTV and home theater wouldn't be willing to spend a little more to guarantee delivery of local HD channels? Would $1 a month crack their nut and be acceptable to subscribers? How about $2 or $3? Personally, I'm paying them an extra $3 a month for the Digital Sports Package, and only because I want the Tennis Channel. Would I pay as much for local HD? Probably.
post #286 of 4993
mphinne2, i had a very similar dialog with Mr. Cartwright and I agree that he seems like a very nice man. What he doesn't consider (or admit, as the case may be) is that plunking down the extra cash for a tuner and an antenna would only offset the cost of monthly cable if we then decided to give up on HBO-HD, SHO-HD, Dicovery HD, INHD, INHD2, HDNet, HDNet movies and any other national feeds (like ESPN-HD, Bravo-HD+....are you listening Time Warner?) that TWC chooses to offer. If we wanted all of the above (and who doesn't?) we would need to invest in both OTA and Time Warner......right now, and for the foreseeable future, Time Warner is the better investment.
post #287 of 4993
Quote:


Originally posted by mphinne2
I understand that your company was forced, by government regulation, to spend a huge amount of money to upgrade to HDTV broadcasts. It just seems to me that your goal as a company would be to maximize the return on your investment. Time Warner offers a high definition box which includes a tuner and HDTV broadcasts of the "locals" for no additional charges over their standard packages. This opens up HDTV to a large and growing group of people who want the advantages that HDTV has to offer. I would think that by offering this programming through Time Warner you would be maximizing your audience and thereby maximizing your advertising dollars.

I think you have some misunderstandings here:

WGME ***LOSES MONEY*** for every viewer that watches their HDTV broadcast. The amount of money they are able to charge for advertising is driven by their audience size -- the larger the audience, the more they can charge advertisers for their commercial programming. Audience size is determined by the Nielsen ratings. At this time, Nielsen ratings are for the NTSC broadcast only. So, when you watch a DTV broadcast, a station actually loses money. As you point out, there are political reasons that they broadcast OTA. I have been pleasently surprised by the number of stations which are actually willing to foot the bill for HDTV (which is NOT government mandated).

As I pointed out a few posts back, HDTV is added value to cable companies -- they DO gain revenue by providing local HDTV -- unlike the local station itself. I can't fault local stations for wanting a piece of that revenue.


Later

Joe
post #288 of 4993
One thing thats bothered me and perhaps this is part of the larger negotiations: Its seems that by taking such a hard stand, Sinclair is actually damaging future considerations with TWC. For instance, TWC's future willingness to add sub-channels to their lineup. Is it because Sinclair's other offerings aren't as substantial as say, Viacom, so they're playing hard ball to try to get guarantees for the future?
post #289 of 4993
It's really hard to tell whom is playing hardball with whom -- the broadcasters like Sinclair and LIN, or the Time Warner affiliates. It may be that the O&O's have more pull and are able to negoiate deals on a national level with Time Warner that Time Warner is not willing to make with smaller companies like Sinclair and LIN. Do you know for a fact that CBS is _not_ receiving "considerations" for allowing HDTV on cable (and satellite) in O&O markets? The considerations might not be direct payments -- they could be related to other networks/channels owned by the parent corporations.

It would be interesting to know if the groups that have deals with TW are providing HDTV for free or for payment.

Later,

Joe
post #290 of 4993
Not to change the subject but did everyone else lose the HD feed to Daytona on lap 143 until the end of the race? I was really dissapointed.
post #291 of 4993
Quote:


Not to change the subject but did everyone else lose the HD feed to Daytona on lap 143 until the end of the race?

Yes. A check of the HDTV Programming forum showed it was a national network problem.
post #292 of 4993
I lost the HD feed also, 6-1 eventually came back on but with SD feed. Major bummer...
post #293 of 4993
Not only did they lose the end of the race, they never kicked it back in for Shrek. I even called WCSH last night around 7pm and got the news desk. The woman who answered said there were no engineers in the building. Someone must of flipped the switch to SD, but I guess they didn't stick around to flip it back? Or is it an automatic thing due to drop outs?
post #294 of 4993
in the past 48 hours, ESPN has signed long term agreements with both Cox and Charter, agreements that include carriage of ESPN-HD. This now makes TWC one of the last MSO's without such an agreement. Hopefully something will be announced soon.
post #295 of 4993
Just wrote to Laurie of TW telling her the same thing and saying that this is a positive sign, since ESPN actually gave in on the amount of increase it wanted each year. They went from 20% to 7 % average over the life of the contract with Cox and Charter. Hope this is the start of something good for TW.

Also asked about getting the Sox and Bruins up here in HD. We'll see what kind of answer we get back.
post #296 of 4993
Someone was telling me that you can receive the standard networks with "rabbit ears" and a HD receiver. Is that true for us up here in Maine? I'm in Auburn, Maine. Please PM me if you can receive ANY HD signals using rabbit ears and how good they are.

Thanks.
post #297 of 4993
I'm in Greene, on the shore of Sabattus Pond. With a powered indoor antenna, in the basement, I was able to pull in only two stations -- WPFO (Fox, analog) and WCBB (PBS, digital).

I moved the antenna to a standard TV on the first floor; there I am able to pull in all the analog Portland stations except WCSH with adequate/poor reception. WPFO and WCBB are the only ones that come in strong. Both are close to the east, twoards Augusta. I don't know whether the Portland digital stations might come in -- I suspect not.

I don't think you'll get good reception with rabbit ears. With a radioshack amplified indoor antenna, you might -- you are closer to Portland than I am. If you can pull in the analog stations strong, you'll have a decent shot at getting the digital stations. With a rooftop antenna, pointed at Portland, you shouldn't have any problems. I'm putting up an antenna this spring.


Later

Joe
post #298 of 4993
Just received this email in response to a query on WMTW's HD Passthrough plans:


Quote:


Based on what I know at the moment, I would say that the new owner (Hearst-Argyle) is very interested in getting network HD pass-thru capability installed ASAP. At this time, we are waiting for the FCC to authorize the sale - until this happens, the new owner cannot legally be involved in station management. We expect the FCC approval in May/04.

Thanks for your interest....

Jack Conner
Director of Engineering

WMTW Broadcast Group, LLC

A few weeks ago, I sent Hearst/Argyle an email query on the subject, and did not receive a reply.


Later

Joe
post #299 of 4993
I emailed Chris Graviss, TW New England engineering VP, after their STB firmware upgrade for the SA3250HD didn't happen on schedule in February. Here's what he had to say:
Quote:


We did in fact activate the DVI function on our Set Top Box a couple of weeks ago. The bad news is it caused a failure in several other areas of our STB functionality. The result was rolling back to the prior code and sending the Application back to the vendor for more testing. We believe we should be able to retest this month and send the code to all STB.

Fingers crossed ...
post #300 of 4993
I wonder how, or if, this delay is affecting the rollout of the new 8000HD DVR's. They are beginning to rollout beyond the original test markets and I was hoping Portland would get them soon!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Local HDTV Info and Reception
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Portland, ME - HDTV